2016/17 collections: moths and beetles

Below is an excellent moth collection from one of last year's students - it was given 80%. Unfortunately my photo isn't so excellent (and as such collections tend to be proudly taken home, it's the only one I have to show you now). You can see that the moths have been pinned and spread in approved traditional fashion. This is a difficult thing to do, and evidently appreciated by the markers ('professional standard!'). They also gave good marks for the neat and informative labels (although they noted that habitat would have been a good addition).

It's good to remember that part of this very high mark came from the effort the collector put into his field diary and monograph. Some of the feedback for the former read: 'very neat and informative... excellent diagrams ... includes processes and methods... should record observations as they occur... should make clear which species caught during which trapping session...' 

Above is a page from the field notebook. I'd say that the idea of making a table with standard headings will help you to record everything neatly, and remember everything every time. But even if you don't go down that route, you need to record information about times and dates, numbers of different species caught, your sampling strategy, the habitat, and so on.

Some possibly useful feedback for the monograph warned against citing too many internet sources, and stressed that you should use the normal citation format you'd use in your essays.

Below is the best beetle collection from last year, earning a mid-80s percentage.

 

The labels aren't so traditional but they're certainly clear, and the additional label at the back emphasises how specimens have been positioned (that is, in family groups). The good number and variety of specimens is recognised in the marking, along with their healthy state of preservation (no squashed or legless beetles here).

 

Again, the overall high mark was supported by effort in the monograph and field diary. The former sounds tricky to master, needing to be both wide ranging and concise (which is why you might not want to leave it until the last minute). The latter was praised for its well-organised content, good level of detail, and (take note) its annotated photos. And I'm not saying that you should judge a book by its cover, but its author has created an attractive notebook which was engaging to look through and read. And that can't be a bad thing.

Yes, it can be a frustrating fiddly process to learn the practical and identification skills these students developed. But I think their collections show that you'll certainly get out what you put in, if you choose these groups.