• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Carnegie Museum of Natural History

One of the Four Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh

  • Visit
    • Buy Tickets
    • Visitor Information
    • Exhibitions
    • Events
    • Dining at the Museum
    • Celebrate at the Museum
    • Powdermill Nature Reserve
    • Event Venue Rental
  • Learn
    • Field Trips
    • Educator Information
    • Programs at the Museum
    • Bring the Museum to You
    • Guided Programs FAQ
    • Programs Online
    • Climate and Rural Systems Partnership
  • Research
    • Scientific Sections
    • Science Stories
    • Science Videos
    • Senior Science & Research Staff
    • Museum Library
    • Science Seminars
    • Scientific Publications
    • Specimen and Artifact Identification
  • About
    • Mission & Commitments
    • Directors Team
    • Museum History
  • Tickets
  • Give
  • Shop

Blogs from our Scientific Researchers

Carnegie Museum of Natural History is home to active research and vast scientific collections. Our scientific researchers regularly contribute to the blog at the museum.

September 9, 2020 by wpengine

Canada Goose

taxidermy mount of Canada Goose

When I think of September and waterfowl, my first thoughts go to the Canada Goose (notice I did not say Canadian Goose which is actually an incorrect name of the bird – there are of course “Canadian Canada Geese”). Nevertheless, my thoughts go to the “American Canada Goose” which seems to be everywhere near water come early fall, and the sounds of them honking puts a little flutter in those Pennsylvanians who hunt. September 1 was the first day of the resident Goose season which runs through September 25th.

Eighty years ago, Canada Geese almost never spent the summer in Pennsylvania. W.E. Clyde Todd, the first curator in the Section of Birds at the Carnegie Museum, kept meticulous records of the comings and goings of many birds in Western Pennsylvania. He has the distinction of the longest tenure of any employee at the museum, having started as a field collector in 1898 and retired and became emeritus curator in 1944. Even after retiring, he continued to come to the museum almost daily until his death in 1969. Mr. Todd, who lived most of his life in Beaver, published the landmark book Birds of Western Pennsylvania in 1940. Several paragraphs in the chapter on the Canada Goose mention early arrivals of the species from the north where they spent the summer as well as late migration to the north where they bred after having spent the winter roaming Pennsylvania fields and waterways. He mentions in the account that the first breeding of American Canada Goose did not occur until 1937 when a few pinioned geese released a few years earlier were successful in breeding in the state.

Today the Canada Goose is almost TOO prevalent for many residents. County and state parks, farm ponds, golf courses, and lawns adjacent to the three rivers seem to be very littered with “fertilizer” which prevents people from running barefoot on the lawns. There are actually professional Geese Police who use Border Collies to chase the geese away from unwanted areas, especially those where lethal means cannot be used. Loud noises have also been used, but as soon as the noises cease or the Border Collies leave, the geese return to foul the lawns and make the water “foul” also. Goose droppings contribute to over fertilization of ponds and lakes causing algal blooms which can be harmful to native fish, invertebrates, and the natural ecosystems of our waterways

Hunting is the only guaranteed method of keeping the resident Canada Goose population in check, of course only in areas where hunting is safe and legal. Hunting can reduce the negative impacts of a species that was not historically a year-round resident. In areas where the practice is safe, legal, and well-regulated, hunting can help to restore ecosystems, reduce local nuisances, provide nutritious food, and get people outdoors! Although the nuisance goose season has liberal bag limits, populations of the birds continue to increase.

Goose recipes can be found on the web using a simple Google Search. There are those who love the taste of a well-prepared bird, and those who think the meat is unfit for human consumption. Make a friend with a goose hunter and you can decide yourself.

Biography of Mr. Todd: https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/auk/v087n04/p0635-p0649.pdf

Book review: https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/auk/v057n04/p0579-p0595.pdf

Canada Goose sounds: https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Canada_Goose/sounds

Stephen Rogers is Collection Manager in the Section of Birds at Carnegie Museum of Natural History. Museum employees are encouraged to blog about their unique experiences and knowledge gained from working at the museum.

Related Content

Lazarus Bird

Bird Watching Bonus

Ask a Scientist: Ravens and Crows, What’s the Difference?

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: Birds, Hall of Birds, Science News, Section of Birds, Stephen Rogers

August 24, 2020 by wpengine

Mesozoic Monthly: Gryposaurus

The Late Cretaceous-aged (~75 million-year-old) large-nosed North American hadrosaur (aka duck-billed dinosaur) Gryposaurus by ginjaraptor on DeviantArt.

Anyone who frequents the Pittsburgh area is familiar with ‘Pittsburghese,’ the regional dialect given full voice in what was once voted America’s ugliest accent (a fact that does not diminish our pride for it). One of my personal favorite Pittsburghese words is “nebby,” which translates to “nosy” for any non-local readers. “Nebby” can be used in a variety of contexts: the distant relative asking prying questions about your love life at Thanksgiving dinner is nebby, the pet cat trying to crawl under the bathroom door to see what you’re doing is nebby, and even the statue of Carnegie Museum of Natural History mascot Dippy the Diplodocus, silently judging your driving on Forbes Avenue, is nebby. We can assume other dinosaurs were nebby too, since so many had huge noses to stick into things. One of the biggest noses in the fossil record belongs to Gryposaurus notabilis, the star of this edition of Mesozoic Monthly.

Gryposaurus belongs to a group of dinosaurs called hadrosaurs, which are commonly referred to as duck-billed dinosaurs. Hadrosaurs were herbivores that got their nickname from the flat, toothless, somewhat duck-like beaks at the tips of their jaws. These beaks were used to bite through tough vegetation so that it could be ground up by the numerous teeth embedded in the rear half of the jaws. There are two main groups of hadrosaurs, both of which are featured in CMNH’s Dinosaurs in Their Time exhibition. Probably the more famous group is the Lambeosaurinae, known for their distinctive head crests that housed extra-long nasal passages. Virtually everyone can recognize the incredible backward-curving crest of Parasaurolophus (featured multiple times in the Jurassic Park franchise), and visitors to CMNH will also know the helmet-like crest of Corythosaurus. The second group is the Saurolophinae (traditionally known as the Hadrosaurinae), which typically lack bony crests. You can find a simulated carcass of the saurolophine Edmontosaurus (lovingly known to those of us in CMNH’s Section of Vertebrate Paleontology as “Dead Ed”) between the two imposing Tyrannosaurus skeletons in Dinosaurs in Their Time.

A gallery of hadrosaur heads. Top left: the lambeosaurine Parasaurolophus at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago (photo by the author). Top right: the lambeosaurine Corythosaurus at Carnegie Museum of Natural History (photo from Wikimedia Commons). Bottom left: the saurolophine Edmontosaurus at the Houston Museum of Natural Science (photo from Wikimedia Commons). Bottom right: the saurolophine Gryposaurus at the Natural History Museum of Utah in Salt Lake City (photo from Wikimedia Commons).

As a crestless hadrosaur, Gryposaurus was a saurolophine. Despite its lack of crest, its skull still had pizzazz: its nasal bone arched dramatically, giving the impression of a ‘Roman nose’ (which is very noticeable if you compare the skulls of Edmontosaurus and Gryposaurus in the image above). The name Gryposaurus notabilis means “notable hooked-nose lizard” in homage to this feature. G. notabilis is the type species of Gryposaurus; type species are typically the first ones to be named in a genus, and therefore become the reference to which all new specimens that may belong to that genus are compared. The other species (such as G. monumentensis, shown in the photo montage above) are similar enough to the type species that they can be referred to the genus Gryposaurus, but they differ in too many ways to be assigned to G. notabilis itself.

Occasionally, paleontologists will revisit a fossil species or genus and decide that it is either too similar to another to justify its own name or that certain specimens are too different to be grouped under the same name. Kritosaurus, another saurolophine with a ‘Roman nose,’ has fallen victim to both of these circumstances. It was originally considered its own genus, but was subsequently revisited by paleontologists who decided that it was so similar to Gryposaurus that the two genera were lumped together under the name Gryposaurus (when combining taxonomic groups, the first name that was published is the one that gets used). However, later paleontologists reviewed the evidence again and split a single species of Kritosaurus back out of Gryposaurus. The famous sauropod (giant long-necked herbivorous dinosaur) Brontosaurus underwent a similar series of changes over the years: originally, it and Apatosaurus were considered different animals, but after a review they were lumped together under Apatosaurus. Recently, the two were split apart again and the name Brontosaurus was revived (to the delight of fans of that name around the world).

It is not uncommon in paleontology for species to be lumped or split based on new or revisited evidence. When you consider that the decision to name new fossil species is often based on fragmentary, highly incomplete skeletons, you can see why it might be difficult to get things right the first time! These changes sometimes give people the impression that paleontologists “can’t make up their minds” or “contradict themselves,” but we must remember two things. First, that science is meant to change based on new evidence. Second, there have been thousands of paleontologists over the course of history, and every one of them is an individual person who can draw their own conclusions based on the same evidence. Although the resulting changes can disappoint fans of a specific animal or hypothesis, revision is normal and beneficial for the field as a whole. Scientists are supposed to be nebby – it’s how we make new discoveries!

Lindsay Kastroll is a volunteer and paleontology student working in the Section of Vertebrate Paleontology at Carnegie Museum of Natural History. Museum staff, volunteers, and interns are encouraged to blog about their unique experiences and knowledge gained from working at the museum.

Related Content

Mesozoic Monthly: Aspidorhynchus

Ah, Snap! Dino Named for Marvel’s Thanos

Jurassic Days: Specimen Scavenger Hunt

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: dinosaurs in their time, Educator Resources, Lindsay Kastroll, Mesozoic Monthly, Museum from Home, Science News, Section of Vertebrate Paleontology

August 24, 2020 by wpengine

Protecting Plant Specimens from Decomposing

It takes a lot of time and care to keep our collections and specimens out of harm’s way. A TikTok viewer asked us on a video of mounting a herbarium specimen, “How do you protect it from decomposing?” and we sought to answer that question, but it would certainly take more than 150 characters. From start to finish, the process can take anywhere from 7 days to weeks, depending on the amount of specimens that we receive. We have roughly 533,000 specimens, and that number continues to grow. Here’s a look at what steps we take to ensure they will last and be preserved for use in the future.

First, we press the new fresh plants between sheets of newspaper and corrugated cardboard and use cam straps to bundle them as tightly as possible.

stack of boards secured with red straps
cardboard, wooden boards, and red cam straps

We dry them rapidly with a box crafted by Bonnie and Joe Isaac.  A small space heater forces warm dry air between the pieces of cardboard. The quick drying is essential to preserving the colors of plants we collect. Quick drying also makes it less likely a plant specimen will rot, mold, or have browning of leaves than if it were just drying at room temperature for several days or weeks. Our method usually dries them in 72 hours or less.

detail of space heater
box setup for quick drying of plant specimens
side view of box setup for quick drying of plant specimens

After they are pressed, we place the specimens in a freezer for at least 24 hours. This will be their first freeze: it is done to get rid of any living pests that may be hiding in the material.

Next, we mount dried plant specimens onto cotton fiber neutral pH archival acid free paper.  The basic Elmer’s glue we use to stick the specimens to the paper is also acid free and good for archival use, as well as the paper and ink used on the data labels. After they are mounted, they will meet with the freezer for at least another 24 hours, assuring any pests that were able to survive the last freeze will be eliminated.

mounting tools: Elmer's Glue-All, archival pen, Glue Stic

Their data are then entered into our database, and we take high resolution photos so that we can post the images alongside their data for use.

Finally, the metal cases we store them in are light tight and airtight, preventing exposure to UV light, insects and pests, humidity, water, and in some cases fire damage. UV light can be the most harmful to the fading and quality of specimens. The longer things are on display the more faded the colors can become, which is part of why behind the scenes collections are so important.

open cabinet full of stacked plant specimens
closed metal cabinets

Maintaining and protecting the collections that we house is a full time labor of love. You see these specimens through so many steps and look closely at each item. You learn their names, their attributes, where they are from, and you share these tiny joys with everyone else when you are able to display these beautiful works of nature and art. So maybe another answer to the question “How do you protect it from decomposing?” is… you just love it a little extra.

Sarah Williams is Curatorial Assistant in the Section of Botany at Carnegie Museum of Natural History. Museum employees are encouraged to blog about their unique experiences and knowledge gained from working at the museum.

Related Content

Going Digital for Nature

Collected on this Day in 1966: Santa Clauses

Museum Conservation: Cleaning the Kayak in Wyckoff Hall of Arctic Life

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: Botany, Hall of Botany, Sarah Williams, Science News, Section of Botany

August 21, 2020 by wpengine

The Bromacker Fossil Project Part IX: The Dissorophoid Amphibians Tambachia, Rotaryus, and Georgenthalia, Capable Travelers

New to this series? Read The Bromacker Fossil Project Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V, Part VI, Part VII, and Part VIII.

The Dissorophoidea are a group of ancient amphibians that were common about 290 million years ago, when the animals fossilized in the Bromacker quarry were alive. The group consists of small to medium-sized water- and land-dwelling vertebrates (animals with backbones) that ate invertebrates (e.g., dragonflies, cockroaches, and millipedes) and vertebrates smaller than themselves. Most scientists agree that modern amphibians (frogs, salamanders, and the reclusive, worm-like, subterreanean caecilians) had their origins among the dissorophoids. Three disssorophoid species are currently known from the Bromacker quarry, and at least one and possibly two more are yet to be described. Two of the described species, Tambachia trogallas and Rotaryus gothae, are members of the dissorophoid subgroup Trematopidae, and the other, Georgenthalia clavinasica, is a member of the subgroup Amphibamiformes. All of them inhabited the terrestrial realm and most likely only returned to water to breed.

Photograph (left) and reconstruction (right) of the skull of the holotype and only known specimen of Tambachia trogallas in dorsal (= top) view. Photograph by the author (2013) and reconstruction by Stuart Sumida, modified from Sumida et al. (1998).

The first trematopid discovered in the Bromacker quarry was found by Thomas Martens in 1980, and it is represented by a poorly preserved skull and skeleton. Stuart Sumida, as lead author of the scientific paper presenting it, coined the name Tambachia trogallas. Tambachia refers to the Tambach Formation, the rock unit preserving the Bromacker fossils, which in turn is named after the nearby village of Tambach, which is now merged with the adjacent town Dietharz to become Tambach-Dietharz. “Trogallas” is from the Greek “trogo,” meaning munch or nibble, and “allas,” meaning sausage, in reference to all of the bratwurst consumed during Bromacker field seasons by the authors of the Tambachia publication (Stuart, Dave Berman, and Thomas). The state where the the quarry is located, Thuringia, is famous for its bratwurst and rightly so. A hot bratwurst for lunch was always welcomed when we experienced what Thomas called “Scandanavian summers,” which were cold and rainy. The then-Bürgermeister (mayor) of Tambach-Dietharz, who also was a butcher, was so thrilled by the name that he hosted an annual bratwurst lunch featuring brats that he’d made. This tradition was carried on by subsequent Bürgermeisters, though they had to buy the featured main course.

Bratwurst lunch in the Thuringian Forest close to the Bromacker quarry. Seated are (from left to right) unknown, Rainer Samietz (then Director of the Museum der Natur Gotha, now retired), Thomas Martens, Johannes Müller (then field assistant and now Professor at Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin), the author, and Stuart Sumida. The Bürgermeister is standing behind Thomas. His bratwurst grill, which he transported in his SUV, is between the vehicles. Photo by Dave Berman (2002).

Skull and partial skeleton of Rotaryus gothae in left lateral (= side) view. Photograph by the author, 2008.

When Rotaryus gothae was found in 1998, only part of the skull was exposed, so we took out a large block expecting a complete skeleton to be preserved, as typically occurs at the Bromacker. Once I began preparing the specimen, however, I was extremely disappointed to find that only a small portion of the body of the animal was present. At least we had the skull, the most scientifically important part of the skeleton. Dave led the scientific study of Rotaryus, and he named it in honor of the Gotha Rotary Club, an organization that generously provided financial support for Bromacker fieldwork. Dave sent the head of the Gotha Rotary Club three choices for the fossil’s name, and the members voted on which one to use.

At the time that Tambachia and Rotaryus were named and described in scientific publications in 1998 and 2011, respectively, trematopids were known only from the USA. Their presence at the Bromacker added to the growing list of animals previously thought to only inhabit North America, such as Diadectes and Seymouria. In hindsight, it is not surprising that trematopids also had a more cosmopolitan distribution, because although they are amphibians, their skeletons were strong enough to support their body out of water and withstand the effects of gravity, thus enabling them to disperse to far corners of the world (though hypotheses of such dispersal assume that no physical or climatic barriers prevented movement).

I was the lucky person who discovered, in 2002, the amphibamiform Georgenthalia clavinasica. I recall lifting up a block of rock that I had loosened with a hammer and chisel and seeing two ghostly eye openings staring back at me. The rest of the skeleton was preserved with the skull, but unfortunately all bone beyond the skull was extremely eroded from groundwater and had the consistency of mashed potatoes.

Photograph (left) and reconstruction (right) of the skull of Georgenthalia clavinasica in dorsal (= top) view. Both by Jason Anderson, 2007.

After Tambachia was named, the Bürgermeister of the nearby village of Georgenthal, whose boundaries included the Bromacker quarry, approached Dave about naming a fossil after his village. Dave then asked Jason Anderson, a colleague from the University of Calgary and the project’s lead researcher, to name it Georgenthalia. Jason created clavinasica from the Latin “clavis” for key, and “nasica” for nostril, in reference to the fossil’s keyhole-shaped nostril, a unique feature that differentiates Georgenthalia from all other amphibamiforms.

Jason, as lead author of a 2008 scientific publication, concluded that the relationship of Georgenthalia to other amphibamiforms was uncertain. Computer algorithms are used to analyze relationships of organisms by tabulating the proportion of unique characteristics shared between the members of the group under study. A group of organisms that share unique characters is called a clade, and members of a clade are considered to be more closely related to each other than they are to members of other clades. These relationships are depicted in a diagram of relatedness called a cladogram.

A 2019 study by dissorophoid expert Rainer Schoch (Curator, Naturkunde Museum Stuttgart) that investigated the ancestry of modern amphibians revealed Georganthalia as a member of a clade that also includes modern amphibians (see figure below). The fossil Gerobatrachus, however, is more closely related to modern amphibians than it is to the clade consisting of Georgenthalia and Branchiosauridae (a group of aquatic amphibamiforms). This indicates that although Georgenthalia (along with Branchiosauridae) is in the clade containing modern amphibians, it is not directly ancestral to them.

Cladogram showing the relationship of Georgenthalia (far right) to modern amphibians. Cladogram modified from Schoch (2019); images of modern amphibians from Wikimedia Commons.

Stay tuned for my next post, which will feature yet another terrestrial amphibian, a fossil from a locality in Tambach-Dietharz.

If you would like to learn more about Tambachia, Rotaryus, or Georgenthalia, please follow the links below.

Tambachia

Rotaryus

Georgenthalia

Amy Henrici is Collection Manager in the Section of Vertebrate Paleontology at Carnegie Museum of Natural History. Museum employees are encouraged to blog about their unique experiences and knowledge gained from working at the museum.

Keep Reading

The Bromacker Fossil Project Part X: Tambaroter carrolli, an Amphibian with a Wedge-Shaped Head 

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: Amy Henrici, Museum from Home, Science News, Section of Vertebrate Paleontology, The Bromacker Fossil Project, Vertebrate Paleontology

August 20, 2020 by wpengine

First ever American Malacological Society virtual meeting, 13-14 July 2020

nine cartoon mollusks in a grid

During two days in mid-July the American Malacological Society (AMS) held its 86th annual meeting over Zoom because of COVID-19 concerns. The occasion marked the first time the organization, whose members study mollusks, convened the gathering virtually. Attendance was greater than recent in-person AMS meetings, perhaps because of the low cost of the event (no travel or accommodation costs) and its appeal to people who shun air travel for its immense carbon footprint. There were more than 150 participants, 49 formal presentations, and 18 posters. Remarkably, thirteen presentations were by students.

As usual I enjoyed hearing about my colleagues’ research, rejuvenating old friendships and making new ones, and simply talking with people who already know that mollusks are vitally important. One surprising piece of information I learned from colleagues is that Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh are ahead of other museums (e.g., Field Museum, University of Florida Museum) in re-opening to the public. Bravo to CMP!

The talk I presented summarized a publication I co-authored with Heather Hulton Van Tassel, Assistant Director of Science and Research at CMNH.  The presentation, titled Is acid precipitation a factor in the decline of the terrestrial tiger snail, Anguispira alternata, in northeastern North America?, “was well-received and elicited some insightful questions. You can hear a 12-minute recording of the talk here:

Current plans are to hold next year’s AMS meeting in Nova Scotia, but if the COVID-19 virus remains a threat, and with the successful outcome of this year’s meeting, we might gather virtually.

Timothy A. Pearce, PhD, is the head of the mollusks section at Carnegie Museum of Natural History. Museum employees are encouraged to blog about their unique experiences and knowledge gained from working at the museum.

Related Content

Ask a Scientist: What is the biggest snail? 

Snail Extinction – Bad Situation Getting Worse

Warm Those Heart Cockles

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: Museum from Home, Science News, Section of Mollusks, Tim Pearce

August 18, 2020 by wpengine

The BSF – Leveraging Our Collections and Expertise to Help Fight Invasive Species

Within the CMNH Section of Invertebrate Zoology resides a program called the Biodiversity Services Facility – the BSF for short. The program is a revenue-generating insect screening and identification service whose principle client is the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and Plant Protection and Quarantine Program (PPQ), as well as various state departments of agriculture. The BSF is designed to support time-sensitive survey work being performed by these agencies to detect invasive species, primarily wood-boring beetles.

As the Primary Identifier and Program Manager of the BSF, I can accurately describe 2020 as a busy year by citing a workload of nearly 8,000 raw trap samples generated through 23 survey projects being run in 16 states, stretching from Maine to Georgia and west to Nebraska and Kansas.

So how did it all begin? Let’s take a look…

In 2001, the country suffered the greatest tragedy in recent memory, the terrorist attacks of September 11. As a response, in 2002, the Office of Homeland Security was created, and during the following years, federal funding and personnel were reallocated from efforts to guard against agricultural and environmental threats to increase screening for human-centered security threats to the country. This resource shift created a void in the areas of pest detection and identification, and it became increasingly important to find outside support to help fill the gaps.

In 2005, through collaboration with Dr. Robert Acciavatti, an entomologist with the U.S. Forest Service and a long-time Research Associate in the Section of IZ, a proposal for a proof-of concept study was submitted to the U.S. Forest Service to determine if the museum could provide the needed identification services as a private contractor to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The proposal called for funding staff to do the contract work as well as providing some collection support for the Section of Invertebrate Zoology. All aspects of the process were quantified: how long it took to check in samples; the time spent in proofing data; the number of samples that could be screened in a day; the number of specimen ID’s generated from any given sample; the resources needed to archive specimens; and the time involved in managing the activities. And most importantly – could it all be done in a fiscally responsible way to offer a service cheaper than existing options, while generating enough funding to complete the work as well as support the essential staff? The results of the project concluded that, yes… it could.

The icing on the cake during the proof-of-concept study was the detection of an invasive bark beetle species (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) native to eastern Asia, Anisandrus maiche Stark. It was found in samples collected at the Moon Industrial Park near the Pittsburgh International Airport. It had not previously been recorded from the United States and in subsequent years was found to already have spread into eastern Ohio and the West Virginia panhandle before its discovery in the Pittsburgh area. Not only had the project proved the work could be done at a competitive price for the USDA, it proved that the taxonomic expertise in the Section of IZ was up to the task. The BSF was officially launched in 2006 and to date has processed nearly 95,000 raw samples, generating nearly $2,000,000.00 in outside funding.

Figure 1. Anisandrus maiche Stark (a species of bark beetle), about 2 mm in body length.

First detected in the United States in 2005 by Robert Androw.

(Image courtesy of Dr. Robert Acciavatti)

When I screen samples, I work against a ‘Priority Pest List’ developed by the USDA that contains the exotic species considered to be the greatest potential environmental threats should they be introduced into the country. In addition to the twenty or so priority pests, I screen for nearly 75 other species known to have been previously intercepted at ports or established in the U.S. to aid in monitoring the distribution of those species. The USDA efforts are guided by a practice dubbed EDRR – Early Detection, Rapid Response – a plan of responding quickly to any new pest detection to improve the likelihood that it can be extirpated before it can spread and become a major problem. To help meet this goal, I work under a self-imposed 90-day deadline for every sample – from the time a sample arrives with its associated collection data, it gets processed and the results reported to the client within 90 days. Prior to the BSF’s formation and involvement, samples could sometimes take as long as two years to get processed by the over-taxed screeners within the existing system.

Most samples are collected using one of two types of traps: the Lindgren funnel trap and the Cross-vane panel trap. Both act as “silhouette” traps – their dark, vertical design can appear to be the trunk of a tree to a flying insect. These can effectively capture many species through this deceptive visual cue alone, but most often, the traps are baited with various chemical lures designed to attract specific species or genera of beetles. Traps can be deployed in forests, in urban parks, outside of warehouses or any other location where pest species may potentially be found. Most traps are run for a period of 10-14 days before the sample is removed from the collection cups and submitted to the BSF.

Figure 2. A Cross-vane panel trap (left) and Lindgren 12-funnel trap (right). Flying insects collide with the trap and fall down into the white sample collection cups which are filled with preservative. The white and blue pouches are filled with chemical lures. (Images from the BSF advertising flyer)

The two most commonly monitored lineages of beetles – Curculionidae (weevils and bark beetles) and Cerambycidae (long-horned beetles) – are both wood-boring taxa, with the damage usually being done by the larvae. The nature of the damage differs across lineages, with most of the damage caused by long-horned beetles being physical in nature – burrows and holes in the wood which hasten decay as well as providing avenues of access to other wood-boring insects. The bark beetles cause a variety of damage but are more likely to spread plant disease by boring into wood and creating chambers in which fungus is deposited by the female as an eventual food source for the larvae. While the long-horned beetles are moderate to large in size, most bark beetles in the weevil subfamily Scolytinae – the primary group of concern – are tiny insects generally less than 3mm in length.

Many target species are small enough to be accidentally discarded if attempts are made to “clean” the sample by removing leaves or other debris. Therefore, the BSF requires raw, unsullied samples to be submitted by our collaborators to ensure that no target taxa are lost during handling of the samples. We have another benign ulterior motive for raw samples to be submitted – to allow us to assess the “bycatch” in detail. This includes examining all specimens in the sample, not just checking for the species on the lists of known pests. This scrutiny ensures the detection of any new invasive not yet known to occur in the country, as was the case with Anisandrus maiche. The bycatch also provides a wealth of native specimens to augment the main IZ research collection. As I screen the samples, I extract all target species, specimens of uncommon to rare native species, specimens representing groups of special interest to the IZ staff, and specimens in groups for which specialists are available to provide identification.

Once the specimens are extracted from the samples, they are prepared and labeled and then sorted by taxonomic groups for identification by me or other specialists. Once ID’d, the specimens have their data captured in a data base with the information made available to the customer through their project page on the BSF web site. In a recent data dump, over 70,000 records of a wide variety of insects, but primarily beetles – were provided to USDA in response to their request for data for a bycatch assessment study. All specimens extracted and data based are permanently archived in the research collections in the Section of Invertebrate Zoology. This allows for reexamination of the actual specimens reported upon as well as providing the comparative material for future identification efforts.

Figure 3. A curated drawer of identified bark beetles from the research collection in the Section of Invertebrate Zoology.

Many of these specimens were acquired from BSF projects over the years.

The bycatch also provides a continual influx of material for various projects underway in the Section of IZ.  My personal group of interest is the Cerambycidae – or long-horned beetles – and thousands of specimens have been documented in support of several faunal studies in progress. Lindgren trap samples from West Virginia have generated many records for long-horned beetles that will be used for an eventual publication on the Cerambycidae of West Virginia. Records of ground beetles taken from the trap samples are being compiled for a publication by Robert Davidson, Collection Manager Emeritus, documenting new state records of Carabidae. Thousands of specimens, from many families of beetles, have also been loaned to various specialists to garner determinations to further enhance the main research collection.

Figure 4. The ‘velvet long-horned beetle’ – Trichoferus campestris (Faldermann) – is a species introduced from Asia into the United States. Specimens from several eastern states have been found in BSF samples. (Image from BugGuide.net, courtesy Jeff Brown, Huber Heights, Ohio)

All-in-all, the Biodiversity Services Facility is a win-win situation – the funding supports collection staff and provides revenue for supplies and equipment, and the USDA and other clients get much needed support in their screening and identification efforts at a competitive price. The samples provide an annual infusion of specimens into the Carnegie collection and the clients receive information that would be otherwise lost about the insects coming to their traps. And maybe most importantly, the BSF leverages the taxonomic expertise of the IZ staff against real-world problems and contributes to making an impact in protecting our environment from invasive pest species.

Bob Androw is Collection Manager in Invertebrate Zoology. Museum employees are encouraged to blog about their unique experiences and knowledge gained from working at the museum.

Related Content

Do No Harm: Dealing with Spotted Lanternflies

How to Prepare Insect Specimens

Mobilizing Millions of Marine Mollusks: Seashells by the Eastern U.S. Seashore

Carnegie Museum of Natural History Blog Citation Information

Blog author: Androw, Bob
Publication date: August 18, 2020

Share this post!

  • Share on Twitter Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook Share on Facebook
  • Share on Pinterest Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit Share on Reddit
  • Share via Email Share via Email

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: Bob Androw, Invertebrate Zoology, Science News, Section of Invertebrate Zoology

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 29
  • Page 30
  • Page 31
  • Page 32
  • Page 33
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 43
  • Go to Next Page »

sidebar

About

  • Mission & Commitments
  • Directors Team
  • Museum History

Get Involved

  • Volunteer
  • Membership
  • Carnegie Discoverers
  • Donate
  • Employment
  • Events

Bring a Group

  • Groups of 10 or More
  • Birthday Parties at the Museum
  • Field Trips

Powdermill

  • Powdermill Nature Reserve
  • Powdermill Field Trips
  • Powdermill Staff
  • Research at Powdermill

More Information

  • Image Permission Requests
  • Science Stories
  • Accessibility
  • Shopping Cart
  • Contact
  • Visitor Policies
One of the Four Carnegie Museums | © Carnegie Institute | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Accessibility
Rad works here logo