Encouragement for last minute collectors

A weird Peltigera (dog lichen) similar to some I found last weekend. CC Ryane Snow

 It's not quite the last minute. You still have a couple of weeks. I'm not being funny, it is entirely the case that you could yet achieve good things with this assignment. You just need to pick something that interests you, and make time to find some specimens, scribble about them in your notebook, identify them, display them, and write a little monograph about them. Not as easy as if you'd started a while back. But much more satisfying than trying to write a last minute essay. And easier to figure out what you have to do to get a good mark, by all accounts.

Today I helped a freshly minted lichenologist. She'd brought in a couple of species on a twig. We went for a little walk in the sunshine and quickly found a few more.

Recognising them is one thing, you might say, but identifying them is another. Ah, but the happy thing about lichens (and many other groups of organisms) is that certain species tend to be found in certain habitats. Before she arrived I took a bit of time to mug up the species on the FSC's Key to Lichens on Twigs. I was aghast to find that I didn't recognise half of them very well. I realised this is because I spend too much of my time breathing city air where most lichens aren't tough enough to live. I might be getting away with an air of knowledgeability because certain species keep turning up locally.

But this is a good thing - for you - because many of the species you find will be from a limited pool. Don't be put off by the overwhelming number that exist across the country.

Lecidella elaeochroma, one of today's haul. Note the black margins where the lichens fight for space. CC image Jymm.

In addition to the FSC key, you can use Nimis, Wolseley and Martellos's 'Key to common lichens on trees in England' (I've printed some off if you want to borrow a paper copy). It seemed to be quite user-friendly when we were using it this afternoon. It's a dichotomous key, which you might want to show markers you can use in addition to the parallel key on the FSC guide.

I always recommend Alan Silverside's lichen site for reliable pictures and descriptions, and you can also see photos on the British Lichens website.

You want to arrange your species so they're in taxonomic groups - you can check that with the database on the Natural History Museum website.

We have an amazing new Leica microscope with camera here, and I would very much like to make some useful guides to local common species to help students in future. I waved off the Madagascar field trippers today (with the 27 crates I'd packed... byeeee) so one can only hope for some downtime. Hah, unlikely. But I am more than happy to help any of you with your last minute taxonomic anguish. Please do come and see me.

Photograph your specimens through the microscope

I sometimes think of myself as a bit of a Luddite eschewing modern technology (a student laughed at me on a field trip last year for actually using a paper map... I like to think he was sorry when his phone ran out of battery). But when it works I do like it really.

Today I finally got a microscope camera to talk to a computer. I won't bore you with the details because the important thing is that it now works and you can now come and use it. Getting the lighting right seems to be a fine art but I'm getting there. You can zoom in to the important features of your specimens, snap a photo, and then print it out and stick it in your notebook. I used it to identify two freshwater snails and I was very pleased.

They both came from a local pond lined with stone blocks (which apparently used to be where the local gentry washed their carriages - who knows). It didn't look like a very promising environment - it's pretty stagnant with more mud than water! But this actually made it a different sort of habitat to the usual ponds we visit - and so it turned up a species I'd not seen before.

You can see this species is very tightly coiled. It's only about 6mm across, and has 5+ whorls.

But also, it's very thin through - only about 1mm. I managed to hold the shell so you can see its aperture (which is pretty round).

So with these relatively few facts and a look at Collins 'Lakes, Rivers, Streams and Ponds', I identified it as Anisus leucostoma -  the White-lipped ramshorn snail. It doesn't care if the pond it's in dries up a bit: it can resist drought by staying in the mud. There's a similar looking species (Anisus vortex) but it's found in running water (and has an oval aperture) - so can be safely discounted I reckon.

For freshwater and terrestrial species I very much like the drawn illustrations in Janus's 'The Young Specialist Looks at Molluscs' (overlook the daft title) - it shows the shells from different angles (you can get a secondhand copy for about £5, or you're welcome to look at mine). The names can be out of date but that's relatively easily sorted (I might make a list to share).

The other species (in fact the only other thing alive it seemed) was a dextral snail (meaning its aperture is on the right if you hold it upright towards you). You can see the aperture is huge compared to the rest of the shell - it's about 3/4 the height. There's a little dichotomous key to Lymnaea (pond snails) in 'LRSP' - if you follow that (and look at the angle at the top of the aperture) you'll conclude this species is Radix peregra, the romantically-named Wandering snail.

I'm sure with a bit more experience with the lighting (and a bit of fiddling with Photoshop) you could make your photos even clearer. These snails were wet and I probably should have dried them to help with reflections and focusing. But I hope this encourages you that tiny things can be photographed fairly clearly. (You can also have a go down the microscope with your phone, with a steady hand).

Also on the subject of snails, did you know that because their shells are so persistent, they're used by archaeologists and people interested in past climates to work out what environments used to be like? You can see here that freshwater snails have been grouped according to their taste in habitat, so if they're uncovered hundreds of years later you can infer what it must have been like where they were living. My Ramshorn snail is in the (quite rudely titled) 'slum' category. One man's slum is another man's perfectly adequate muddy pond, thankyou. Also, 'catholic' doesn't refer to the snails' religious beliefs, but that they have wide-ranging habitat tastes.

 from Brown (2001) with updated names

So if you're collecting snails - or anything - the moral of the story is to look in a variety of habitats, and then you will find a wider range of species.

Your new skills can help make a difference

A lot of moths visiting a trap in Brunei, 1982. CC image Accassidy.

The other afternoon I was listening to Inside Science on Radio 4, and they had a piece about 'moth snowstorms'. That is, people were remembering when they would drive along in the countryside at night, and moths would be flying in from all angles into their headlights, and they'd have to start their windscreen wipers. It's certainly not something I've experienced in my lifetime. In fact it seems quite a mad idea, even though it must have been unremarkable not so long ago. Something that did ring a bell was motorcyclists saying they used to have to stop regularly and clean their visors of squashed flies. I can remember (in the 90s) saying to my dad that my friend's car was covered in gummy dead insects, and him complaining that it must have meant we were driving too fast. Some people suggest cars might be more aerodynamic these days, which might account for why gummy insects don't seem to be a problem. But that doesn't explain the visor thing - there'd still be insects on visors.

My point is, we seem to be losing insects, fast. Data from amateur entomologists' malaise traps suggest a loss of 75% in the last 25 years. I don't need to tell you that sounds pretty terrifying, when insects are a fundamental part of the food chain and pollinate a lot of plants (including our food plants). It was astoundingly refreshing to hear that the alleged environment minster, Michael Gove, has actually come round to the idea that neonicotinoid pesticides need stricter controls. One can only hope it's not shutting the door after the horse has bolted. You'd imagine spraying pesticides all over fields can't have helped matters, in addition to problems caused by other modern farming methods. So perhaps stopping spraying them might help restore some of the invertebrate populations.

A malaise trap. CC image Ceuthophilus. Nothing to do with uneasy-feeling malaise (though that may be for the insects), but actually invented by the Swedish Mr. Malaise in the 1930s.

Whilst this sounds like environmental doom and gloom (which yes, it probably is) - you have chosen this degree course so presumably want to try to make the world a better place. You can be part of the antidote to your own gloom. By developing your identification skills and submitting records to recording schemes and records centres, you can help make some difference. Your data can feed into a big picture which can persuade the powers that be to actually do something. This might not be a straightforward process because it involves politics. But having the scientific evidence has to be of critical importance, surely.

You might think "ah, what difference can I make? :( " But there really aren't that many people out there who have good identification skills. Particularly if you focus on something even slightly obscure. If you chose to go to a local habitat and record what you find, it's possible that nobody would have done that for ten, twenty years (or even ever). You might find something Really Interesting, and conceivably that could help get the site a modicum of protection one day. And even if you don't, it all becomes part of valuable data about today, and can be compared with what happens in future, and if records exist, with what was present in the past. (iRecord is an easy way to submit a record of anything you find, but if you prefer the support of a specialist scheme, the Biological Records Centre has a comprehensive list of contacts.)

Student A's lovely lichen find. CC image Jason Hollinger (California)

The other day, one of the third years popped in to see me. She chose lichens for her collection last year and got really into them. She'd been out lichen-hunting recently. When she got home and looked in her 'Dobson' guide, one of them seemed to be something unusual. The only species that seemed to match was a distinctive orange-grey lichen with little eyelashy spines around the fruiting bodies. But Dobson said it had only been seen in very few areas and was now thought extinct in this country. She had a tiny sample and we both squinted at it down the microscope. Nothing else seemed to match. I said I thought she should speak to David Hill, my esteemed lichen tutor from my course.

It turns out she was right with her identification and he was "super excited". Isn't that amazing! So this is proof that you too can find and report something excellent. She's brought something back from apparent extinction. I guess the poor lichen was never quite extinct in the first place (though it's evidently very rare) - but the point is, how many people are looking at lichens, and how many people have the skill to identify them? Not many. So your developing skills can make an impact. You can be one of an elite group that is knowledgeable and enthusiastic about lichens, beetles, mosses, or whatever it is that grabs you. We can only conserve things when we know they exist. You will be able to contribute to the body of knowledge of what's out there. Be encouraged.

There are links to over 200 recording schemes at the NBN Gateway.

For your Christmas list*: a hand lens

(*Other popular religious and secular present-buying opportunities are available. Or just treat yourself.)

I've just been to Dartmoor with the new first years. Likely you went on this trip yourself and will be able to recall the amazing Wistman's Wood, an eldritch botanical wonderland dripping with lichens and mosses. I think it's one of my favourite places.

CC image by Alex Jane

Students are obliged to spend some time collecting data about un-botanical things like wind speed. But whenever possible I tried to lure them towards close examination of the weird and diverse species covering the trees and boulders. A few people looked like they got seriously hooked, which was very gratifying. And I think the secret to an appreciation of lichens and bryophytes is a simple thing: a hand lens.

I wish I could present one to everybody but it seems university bean-counters are not keen. I can always lend you one (quality and smeariness varies). But ultimately I would urge you to consider getting one yourself. It doesn't have to cost much and it will last you a lifetime. Plus you will always have it to hand if it just lives in your bag. And you won't have any slight squeamishness about holding it right up to your eye after a dozen other people have had it in their clammy hands. Seriously, it will open up a entire microscopic world that you cannot really predict. I'd say it makes Everything more interesting - the unsuspected detail of plants and invertebrates and all sorts. But in the short term it'll certainly make your collecting a more interesting experience and make it easier to identify what you're looking at.

Like I say a million times, 'Hold it right up to your eye'. CC image from the National Park Service.

But what to get? Magnification of x10 is fine for most things. You can get twin versions which have (say) a x10 at one end and a x15 at the other if you're feeling fancy. Another thing to consider is the diameter. My lens is about 15mm across. Larger diameters are recommended.  I thought I was quite happy with mine but now I'm starting to wonder if a larger diameter wouldn't be better - it transmits more light and makes things easier to see.

You do want something that's of good enough quality that it's not going to annoy you with its blurry pointlessness. You don't necessarily have to spend huge amounts though.

This Quicktest page shows you how different lenses vary in quality (which is quite eye-opening) and therefore in price. They have a large range for sale and they make it very clear what you're getting. There are also many other reliable places, like the local company Brunel Microscopes, or UKGE, or entomological suppliers like Watkins and Doncaster,

 This is the one I have at the moment, from Quicktest, which is about £30 with delivery. It has a slightly larger size than most, so lets in a bit more light, and seems super clear - I'm really pleased with it. But you don't have to go that mad - something about £15 can be pretty decent, judging by the advice linked to above. Cheaper ones are a good way in but they're necessarily blurrier and more likely to fall apart. I bought a load of half-decent ones for work last year, but they're extremely pocketable and disappear constantly. This is disappointing and makes me loathe to spend as much again - but then spending less is a false economy if the lenses are rubbish. So if you're even half keen it's a good reason to get your own and look after it - it should last a lifetime if you don't lose it!

I'd also recommend getting a lovely bright lanyard to attach to it. Then it's much easier to find if you put it down somewhere or it falls into the vegetation. There's a huge selection on Ebay, for example. If you wear your lens round your neck you will recognise and be recognised by other natural history buffs, like some sort of weird masonic tie / handshake. This is not necessarily a bad thing: you might meet someone knowledgeable and interesting. Nerdy, probably. But nerdy about something interesting.

Public domain image by Bill Gillette - girl on a fieldtrip in the Rockies, 1972

A useful thought I read recently - when you're using it, think of it as a keyhole. That is, you must put your eye right up to it to see through. Either bring the object you're looking at towards your eye, or (often more undignified but unavoidable) bring yourself close to the object. The latter is why you might see lichen enthusiasts sprawled across the landscape, bums in air, apparently pressing their faces against the rocks.

And finally, it's possible to integrate this low-tech highly-useful bit of equipment with modern technology: with a bit of practice you can take photos through it with your mobile phone. And those would be perfect stuck in your notebook.

(P.s. - What's more, a lens will repay you handsomely on the field trip to Tenerife, where there are many fascinating plants with strange adaptations to examine microscopically. I much recommend getting one in readiness for that).

2016/17 collections: lichens

The marks for the lichen collections varied wildly. But there were some excellent ones. This one was given a mark in the mid-80s. It certainly looks amazing, with lots of good quality specimens beautifully arranged and labelled in an easily openable case.

The labels were praised, although the markers did mention that habitat type could also have been included. They mentioned that the strict alphabetical layout meant that two of the Physcias were not together. I think I'd want to see the families on the labels too, so that species in the same family would be more obvious - they don't always have the same genus name.

The field notebook was given one of the best marks I could see across the whole class - approved for its excellent detail of site descriptions, notes on species, clear identification and discussion of diagnostic features, with sketches and maps.

 This field notebook comes from another collection which also got a First. It was also praised for its good site and specimen notes - although it's worth noting that should you use someone else's photos as illustration, you should reference where they come from. You should make a clear note of the identification source you are using too.

Identification thoughts

A lichen from yesterday, Hypogymnia physodes, and its weird inflated catpaw lobes. CC image James Lindsey.

I had a nice afternoon yesterday with student T and her extensive lichen collection. We were using a combination of guides and keys and a bit of my prior familiarity with their appearance. It made me think of two things. Firstly, that it's always a good idea to use more than one source of identification. I do love the FSC but even they can't squash everything onto a fold-out guide - lichens are great when they look like they're supposed to, but sometimes they just don't. You might think that's because they're a totally different species and I just can't identify them. But it's not always that. It's because many of them are annoyingly variable. If you went on KL's lichen jaunt around campus the other week, you'll have seen my attempt to make a guide that includes half-eaten lichens as well as pristine ones. It's not even nibbling that's the main problem though - sometimes the lichens look different just because of varying conditions where they're growing (or possibly they do it just because they feel like it, who knows). So, point one, whatever you're collecting, it helps to have a variety of (reliable) descriptions and photos. Hopefully I've given you a few options for your own group in this blog, but I'll keep looking.

Secondly, lots of people have limited transport, so only collect their lichens where they can get to around Bristol. This has the effect of making me look cleverer than I am, because the species they turn up with are generally on a relatively limited list. Nitrogen dioxide and other pollutants limit which can live in the city. So point two, if you can obtain an idea of what you're expecting, it can help. For lichens, the FSC fold-out guides are habitat based (eg urban, heaths, seaside) which is great. And when we were doing the mosses the other day, there were lists at the back of the book for different habitats (it's also online). This is useful as an additional identification strategy (especially with groups where there are many many species in this country).

Lichens for last minute panickers

Ramalina farinacea, a surprisingly fluffy (fruticose) lichen that can be found on a tree near you. Image by MMParedes

On Friday I had a little wander round campus looking for lichens, in advance of meeting a student coming to use the microscopes to identify her specimens.

I expect no-one sensible would leave collecting things so late. But should you be in such a position (being charitable, there are many reasons why you could be, maybe your previous efforts have gone hopelessly awry) - then I think lichens could be a good choice. You're still going to have to make a good attempt at your log book to show how thorough your identifying is. But you won't have problems of preservation for one thing. And with a lens or microscope, some species are identifiable relatively painlessly, especially if you can narrow them down by habitat (i.e. the hardcore selection that can tolerate urban twigs).

I managed to find eight species pretty quickly. And the student had six others I didn't have, also collected around Bristol. Some were a bit of a pain but we were reasonably sure about 90% of them. Fourteen species wouldn't make an unimpressive collection.

We used the FSC fold-out twig key to start with, and combined this with the keys and pictures in Dobson.

But you could also try the NHM's online key or this downloadable key to lichens on trees.

Then there's always Alan Silverside's website for more photographs and descriptions, once you've narrowed things down. I've also been looking at Jenny Seawright's Irish Lichens website (also with photos and descriptions) and Mike Sutcliffe's British Lichens site (mostly photos).

But do please come in and use the microscopes - it's so much easier to see what you're looking at, and in any case the lichens are so lovely magnified.

I'm not saying lichens are easy, they really aren't. But if you collect them in the city, it's likely that they'll be among a select group and that will make identifying them a bit easier.

(And for those out of town, I've found another online key.  Brian Eversham has a key to heathland lichens but this is only for lowland species.)

General thoughts on collecting

Finnish entomologist Johan Sahlberg and his botanist wife Mimmi, just before they left on their honeymoon field-trip in 1873. Photograph by Antero Saalas.

 The Legal bit: Technically, you should only collect where you've been given permission by the landowner. Realistically, if you collect a sprig of grass from a roadside, no-one is likely to demand you are thrown in jail. But bear it in mind that under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, it is illegal to uproot any wild plant without permission from the landowner. 'Plant' includes algae, lichens, mosses, fungi and vascular plants. You don't need to uproot anything of course, just take parts of it. If you haven't got permission to be on someone land, you shoud confine yourself to public land and footpaths, or else you could get in trouble for trespassing, and that's before you've picked a thing. It doesn't hurt to be following the Countryside Code in general.

It is quite complicated in law, because there's no single law that covers such things. You do have some rights as a 'forager' which have built up around collecting plants for food. The British Mycological Society have some sensible advice regarding picking fungi but you'll find there's increasing worries about people collecting large amounts of mushrooms and then selling them to fancy restaurants (selling things on is not really in the spirit of traditional foraging).

Also, it is very tempting to want to go to a nature reserve to collect - after all, that's surely where all the nature is? Actually, you'll find you can collect a remarkable number of species from uncontroversial places. If you really do want to collect at a nature reserve, you should ask first. In my experience they may give permission - just contact the relevant Wildlife Trust (etc.) and explain you are doing a taxonomic collection for university and only want a specimen or two of common species. Reassure them that you will not be digging anything up, least of all their rare species. Always take the minimum amount of material necessary wherever you are.  

 There's more advice in the Wildflower Society code of conduct. You might also want to read the Botanical Society of Britain and Ireland's code of conduct. It encouragingly says "Collecting small amounts of plant material for identification purposes, for private herbaria, for research or as voucher specimens is usually acceptable, except in the case of protected or Red List species. Indeed, collecting is often necessary if botanical expertise is to be developed."

 The Amateur Entomologists Society has similar advice concerning invertebrates. Although I feel pangs of guilt killing them, the main threat to species in this country is habitat loss. The code points out that "collecting should always be limited to the minimum necessary for the purpose intended, as well as by full compliance with legal requirements relating to particular sites and species."   

It is rather unlikely you'll come across rare species (the clue being in the name). Surprisingly, very few are specifically protected by law. Obviously, if you're in a reserve where one exists, you should make yourself aware of its appearance and avoid collecting any.

In short, use common sense and all will be well. Stick to public places and no-one will threaten you with a shotgun. Develop a casual demeanour and learn to shrug off the strange looks the public will doubtless throw you. Never be without a plastic bag or collecting pot. The latter is the best bit of advice I can give you :)

 

The Health and Safety bit: 

If you look at the course guidance on Blackboard, you will see that before going out collecting it requires you to send a risk assessment to Katy. This is not so onerous, as there is a generic version on Blackboard - you just need to go through it and remove anything irrelevant to your own situation, and perhaps add in anything extra. 

For example, you can delete any of the chemicals you won't be using for preservation. You've survived this long so presumably you are good at common sense - but here's a recap anyway-

Take someone with you (it's more fun, besides).
 Let someone know where you're going and when you ought to be back (a map and a phone are useful too).
Especially if you're like me, take a snack and something to drink so you don't pass out in a ditch.
Take your medicine with you if you suffer from some life-threatening illness (now I feel like I'm talking to my mother).
Take some sensible clothing and footwear with you (and now I am turning into my mother).

Fill in your details on the form - send a copy to Katy and keep a copy for yourself.
Then you can go forth and start collecting.

Presenting your lichens

Graphis scripta, not known for legibility. CC image by Ed Uebel.

The packet method is traditional for long-term storage of lichens. So you could hand them in in packets arrayed one behind the other (in taxonomic groups) in a box - like this picture of a moss herbarium at Yellowstone National Park. You can make the packets the same way as the ones you used for collecting. This is the traditional style preprinted envelope I used for handing in samples on a lichen course I attended. This has got more than the bare what, where, when and who information,  - but as long as you include at least those either on the envelope or a separate label, you'll be fine.

But lichens are aesthetically pleasing and most if not all students who've collected them in the past have gone for a more open display. You could put them in a single clear-fronted case, or in lots of little boxes, or perhaps fasten them to a piece of mountboard, or make some kind of more naturalistic 'lichen diorama'. It depends how sober or creative you want to be. I just can't find an example of such a thing on the internet, which is distressing, and all previous lichen collections here have been proudly taken home by their creators. I look forward to taking a photo of yours.

And this being a taxonomic collection, you should make efforts to arrange them taxonomically in your display. But lichens are a bit strange because they're a symbiosis between two types of organism - a fungus plus an alga or cyanobacteria. Taxonomists have named and arranged them according to the fungal part of the relationship. If you want to know what the other part is, Dobson often says. It can be useful to know for identifications, because one of the photobionts, Trentepohlia, is orange not green when you scratch the lichen's surface.

When you're learning to identify lichens, it's really helpful to divide them by form: crustose, squamulose, foliose, fruticose... but those aren't taxonomic divisions and your display shouldn't be organised on that alone. It would be better to include the name of the family, and divide them like that.

I recommend using the Natural History Museum's Dictionary of UK Species to ensure you have up-to-date names and the correct family information.

If you have any questions, please do come and ask me, and bring your specimens!

Long tailed tits frequently use lichen in their nest building. CC image by Alan Shearman.

Lichen identification

CC image by Jim McCulloch

Lichens grow on all sorts of substrate - bark, wood, stone, soil, even moss and other lichens. This is a useful identification feature. You can collect many species just from twigs -  the Field Studies Council have produced a guide. We have copies of this you can borrow, and similar ones for other lichen habitats. They're very cheap if you want to buy one. The reverse has a lateral key which encourages you to look at the lichens' forms and introduces you to some of the descriptive terminology.

I think it's very good. But the pictures are quite small, and it's nice to have a reliable alternative to check against. I think Alan Silverside's lichen pages are an excellent online option once you've got an idea of what your species or family might be. His photos are very clear and come with a detailed description of the species. Mike Sutcliffe's British Lichens site is also a reliable place to look for photographs.

You might want to have a look at this 'Key to Nature' online key for lichens on twigs in England.
It's been developed by Reliable Lichen Experts so should work well. Alternatively the same authors have written a printoutable similar key which you can download here.

Luxuriant Scottish Usnea. CC image by Nick Rowland.

The Lichen Bible though is Frank Dobson's book 'Lichens - an illustrated guide to the British and Irish species'. Once you've had a go with the FSC guide you should really brace yourself and look at this tome. There's a copy in the library and we do also have a couple of copies you can borrow. It's got detailed descriptions and several types of key. (If you remember, you must show in your field notebook that you can run species through the key). At first you might feel overwhelmed, but it's logically set out - and most of the species will be irrelevant to your own mystery lichens at the moment, since many are rare or restricted geographically or by substrate. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but if you arrange to see me, we can look at the key together and I can give you some help.  (It's certainly not cheap, but if it turns out you have the lichen bug you might want to buy a copy - though beware, old editions have black and white photos not colour).

An interesting thing about Dobson is that he includes chemical tests where they're relevant. This can be a real boon when you're in a lichen-identifying dilemma. There aren't tests for everything, but they can be really useful in confirming or denying your hunch and choosing between similar-looking species. There are three main chemicals (which I can provide), and if you get really into it there's even the option of cutting sections, making slides and adding other chemicals to them whilst looking down the microscope. Am I getting carried away? Very possibly. Most of this is not necessary unless you get super keen.

Read on for information about  how to label and present your specimens.

Harris Tweed, made in the Outer Hebrides, was traditionally dyed with Parmelia lichens. They gave it a distinctive smell! Image by PKM.

Collecting lichens

Nice apothecia. Image by Lairich Rig.

Although you may remember the stupendous trees dripping with lichens at (the very protected) Wistman's Wood on your Dartmoor field trip, there are plenty of lichens in much more accessible places - in fact, there a lot of species even on campus.

Don't forget your handlens (x10 will do). It is the duty of every lichenophile to be shot weird looks by members of the public while squinting through a handlens at apparently uninteresting treetrunks, boulders and gravestones. Don't be embarrassed, they're the ones missing out. It's only when you look at lichens under magnification that you realise how curious and amazing their forms are.

You can read my advice about getting landowner's permission before collecting, which is essential for protected areas like nature reserves and SSSIs - but remember you will be sure to find plenty of common species everywhere. Common sense applies about the amount you take - as the British Lichen Society recommends, leave plenty behind so the species can survive.

Some of them will be firmly attached to walls and pavements of course, and I don't particularly recommend chiselling them out. That's why, although there is an FSC guide to churchyard lichens which you would surely enjoy using, it won't be of great use when it comes to making your collection. You need to find some you can take home.

But you can find portable lichens in all sorts of habitats - on soil on heaths or roadsides, on dead trees in a wood, amongst plants on calcareous grassland, clinging to pebbles on a beach.

Lichen-covered pebbles. CC image by Roger Cornfoot.

Lichens on twigs are particularly easy to collect as you'll find fallen twigs that can be cut into lengths at home - there's no need to remove the lichens and risk damaging them. Many species are of course embedded in their substrate - if they're on the trunk of a large tree you might want to take a sliver of bark off with a knife. Even if they're foliose they may still be connected quite firmly at their base and you will want to ensure you have this as it may show useful characteristics for identification.

However there are issues you just need to be aware of with knives, beyond the obvious health and safety ones - please read what I've written on the fungi collecting page. 

As you collect you'll need to make a note of where you're finding your specimens - for lichens the habitat, substrate (and maybe aspect) are important. One way to keep everything organised is to make some lichen packets and give them numbers.

It's much better to use paper packets than plastic bags, because any moisture won't stay trapped and turn your lichens mouldy. You should open the packets when you get home and give the lichens an airing. Then they should be fine - they don't need any special preservation techniques.

Read on for more about how to identify your lichens

and how you might present them. 

Lovely lovely Cladonia. CC image by James Lindsey.

Some words about the marking scheme

You can read the official guidance on the marking scheme on Blackboard. This is the basic structure:

You can see that you're going to pick up a lot of points merely by getting organised early and doing the things the guidance asks you to do - it's not some subjective number plucked out of the air, so make sure you're following, and it you can get a high mark!

The 30% for 'the collection' means you'll be assessed on the quality and quantity of your specimens. Keep collecting throughout the year and you will get lots to put in - try not to leave everything until the last minute. People often ask how many they should submit, and I've written some thoughts here. Choose specimens that are undamaged and show the critical diagnostic features. Preserve them in a manner appropriate to the group you're collecting.

With 'identification and labelling' you can easily pick up marks just by including all the essential what / where / when / who information. Of course, accuracy of identification is very important! But if you collect a wide variety specimens you may be able to afford leaving out any you're unsure of. It's better to submit fewer specimens which are identified correctly, than loads of which half are wrong.

Presentation and display only offer 10 marks - but if you can be neat and set your specimens out taxonomically, clearly and attractively, it's surely an easy 10 marks? If your handwriting is illegible (or even if it's not) you can print your labels. I've tried to offer some advice about ways to display your specimens in the information about each taxonomic group. You can go down the traditional route or let your imagination roam.

The official guidance sets out in detail what should be in the field diary and the monograph- if you make sure you follow its advice, you will get marks accordingly! As I've said elsewhere, the field diary "only" gets 15% of the marks. But recording things in it diligently will pay dividends when you come to identify and label your specimens.

Just a small word of caution - some of the group-specific guidance on Blackboard is quite 'vintage' so be aware that some identification books recommended may have been superceded... I hope I've given you some more recent ideas on this website though.

'Who' - the final bit of essential information

The author assists a student in identifying some aquatic invertebrates

There aren't that many people out there who have the skills you'll develop while you're doing this assignment. 

And not only that, you'll be producing a record of the species that exist out there right now - and quite probably (because not that many people are doing such a thing), the species you collect and identify might not have been noted from the particular area you took them from before. Possibly ever, and at the least, often not for a long time.

So your records could be really useful - they can feed into a bigger picture about the biodiversity of this country and how it might be changing.

Around Bristol you could send your records to the Bristol Regional Environmental Records Centre (BRERC) - the people there would ensure your data would be sent to specialist recording schemes (see below) and eventually added to the National Biodiversity Network (NBN) Gateway. From there it could be used for all sorts of useful research, even contributing to scientifically supported changes in government policy (yes such things have been known).

If your gathering took place further afield, you can find the appropriate records centre on this list from the National Forum for Biological Recording.

Or, you may prefer to send them directly to one of the many recording schemes for specific groups of organisms: the national Biological Records Centre has a list of them (including certainly niche but perhaps nerdily cool things like slime moulds, ticks and stoneworts). In fact, if you get really into your subject, you'll be able to find much future support from these groups.

Different recording schemes might require your records in slightly different formats - but one thing all of them will want is the What, Where, When and Who.

The Who is you - as it's likely that you will have both collected and identified your specimens. So technically, you should add your name to each of your labels.

Without the who, you've certainly got a taxonomic collection, but you haven't truly produced any biological records with a potentially wider value. However, you may say that your work is supposed to be marked anonymously, and that you don't want (and shouldn't have) your name on it. You certainly won't be marked down for not putting your name on it, and from the point of view of the university, you probably shouldn't put your name on it. There is the dilemma and I leave it with you.