BUCKS INVERTEBRATE RECORDING GROUP NEWSLETTER N0.4 Many thanks to all the contributors to the Group's fourth Newsletter. Apologies for its. slightly later production this year - I believe the phrase is ncircumstances beyond our controln. As with previous issues, if there are any subjects that you feel have been neglected, please forward articles for Newsletter no.5 to: ,

Kate HawkinsIJulian Scott Buckinghamshire County Museum Technical Centre Tring Road Halton Aylesbury HP22 5PJ 0296-696012

VOLUCELLA ZONARIA AND OTHER ILLUSTRATIONS

Following our last meeting I was prompted by Mr Cecil Monk's work to look back through some of my old sketch books. I offer these drawings to Dipterists in the Group to identify during the long winter evenings when flies may be a little hard to find. The large ink drawing is, of course Volucella z o n a r i a and

9 -T~r-ax o r bvok-on

tome

ba-c~

Bombt*s

T'IAA buwbie PS'.* Y- v n.S

-

~ i - c c . ~ bumb\e o

bees

bees

.Sp&se

hair, s h i q F\*^ titervtiy . N O

repoHem b a k e r

yel~oi.~

I am sure that Dipterists will spot any inaccuracies that are present. I also found some drawings of spiders that I hope will appeal to Arachnophiles. The sketches are dated October 1985 and the specimens were captured in the grounds of what is now Middlesex University from a damp scrubby woodland edge, with the exception of V . z o n a r i a , which came from Surrey, date unknown. They were sketched through a drawing tube attached to a binocular microscope as part of a project, though these particular sketches were not taken any further. Additionally I include this simple key to help with the identification of Bumble Bee species. This is a copy I made from an original drawing at Skokholm Island Bird Observatory, Dyfed, Wales, and I believe it to be second or third hand, possibly used as part of a Bumble Bee density or distribution survey. I personally found it very useful. Mark Iley

REPORT OF THE INVERTEBRATE GROUP MEETING BASED AT HALTON. 16TH MAY 1992

I have to start with an apology, the extensive list of spiders collected from Aston Clinton Ragpits that you have all been waiting for is going to have to wait until the next issue. I had every intention of getting into the lab. to identify them but, you know how it is, one thing and another, new Museum displays to design by yesterday etc. My new year's resolution - to identify last year's spiders1 The meeting that we held at Halton on the 16th May last year was productive, if sparsely attended. Tony and Val Marshall, Mark Iley, Eric Hollowday, George and Frances Higgs, Peter Hall & Martin Albertini all managed to get along at some stage, and the following are a selection of what we found. Many thanks to those who have sent in their records and if I have missed any, could you send them 0x17 The central feature at the Technical centre itself was the pond (one of the changes that the Museum staff have made to the ground maintenance since we arrived). Eric was in his element, and it is to him that the majority of these records (and their commentaries) can be attributed. In addition to the common water beetle H e l o p h o r u s a q u a t i c u s ( = H . a e q u a l i s ) , and a variety of planarians and algal species (the dinoflagellate P e r i d i n i u m sp. ; D i n o b r y o n sp. & A p i o c y s t i s b r a u n i a n a Naegeli), Eric found the following rotifers: P o l y a r t h r a d o l i c h o p t e r a Idelson 1925; very abundant. A species adapted to large open ponds but also occurring in this kind of habitat. S y n c h a e t a t r e m u l a (MUller 1786) ; quite numerous. An open water species but usually in smaller ponds. Other members of this genus planktonic in large lakes and the sea. L e p a d e l l a p a t e l l a (Muller 1786); a loricated weed-haunting grazing species. Very common in weed in most aquatic habitats. T e s t u d i n e l l a p a t i n a (Hermann 1783); a very flat, discoid rotifer adapted for swimming between strands of filamentous algae. Common round margins of ponds. Notommata a u r i t a (MUller 1786) ; a carnivorous species found among weed in small ponds. Can also occur in bird-baths.

Mytelina mucronata (Muller 1773); a loricated species, common amongst weeds in shallow ponds. Squatinella tridentata (Fresenius 1858); widespread in ponds, moor pools and canals, usually between plants, sometimes in open water. & a Cephalodella -sp.; which must remain unnamed, since we did not have the facilities for Eric to dissolve out the trophi.

In addition to the above Eric found the heliozoon (Protozoa) Actinosphaerium eichorni.i. This is a protozoan with a radially symmetrical body based on a siliceous skeleton and possessing radiating pseudopodia with a central axial filament. Actinosphaerium is multi-nucleate and can reach a large size, visible to the naked eye. It feeds on other protozoans and rotifers which it entraps in the radiating pseudopodia and ingests by the formation of external food vacuoles. It tends to roll over and over on its long stiff pseudopodia on bottom debris. As well as the above in the pond, we found the ladybirds Adalia bipunctata, Calvia 14-guttata & Coccinella 7-punctata, a newly emerged specimen of Ischnura elegans, the Blue-tailed Damselfly, and cast skin of a Libellula species from the previous year. L.depressa, the Broad-bodied Chaser, was the most common anisopteran on the pond this year after Sympetrum striolatum, the Common Darter, but we have had visits from L.quadrimaculata, the Four-spotted Chaser in the past. This year's tally of Odonata on the pond amounts to 10 species ; in addition to the above Coenagrion puella, the Azure Damselfly; Enallagma cyathigerum, the Common Blue Damselfly; Aeshna cyanea, the Southern Hawker & Aeshna grandiS, the Brown Hawker ; Anax imperator, the Emperor Dragonfly; and Orthetrum cancellatum, the Black-tailed Skimmer have all put in an appearance. On the day of the meeting we also visited the BBONT Reserve and SSSI, Aston Clinton Ragpits, where Tony and Val recorded the following: Discus rotundatus Monacha cantiana Cepaea nemorali s Cepaea hortensis Coccinella septempunctata Calvia quattuorodecimguttata Propylea quat tuordecimpunctata Psyllobora vigintiduopunctata Pieris brassicae Pieris napi Anthocharis cardamines Callophrys rubi Hamearis lucina Inachis io Parage aegeria Bi bio marci Bombylius major Empis tessellata Eristalis pertinax Andrena ful va Bombus lucorum Psithyrus vestalis

Brown lipped snail Seven-spot ladybird 14-spot ladybird 22-spot ladybird Large White Green-veined White Orange Tip Green Hairstreak Duke of Burgundy Fritillary Peacock Speckled Wood St Marks Fly Bee Fly Tawny mining bee White-tailed bumble bee Vestal cuckoo bee

Armadillidium vulgare

Whilst we were there, we bumped into Steve Gregory who was on a flying visit to the County recording myriapods & isopods. His list for the day is as follows : G 1 omeri S m a r g i n a t a Macrost ernodesmus p a l i c o l a Bra chydesmus s u p e r u s Nema S oma va ri c o r n e Proteroiul us fuscus Tachypodoiu l u s n i g e r Cylindroiulu s punctat u s C y l i n d r o i u l u s bri t a n n i c u s Cryptops anomalans Necrophl oeophagus lo n g i c o r n i S Hapl o p h i l u s s u b t e r r a n e u s Li thobius forficatus Li thobius microps Li thobius variegatus Trichoniscus p u s i l l us Oniscus a s e l l u s P h i l o s c i a muscorum Platyarthrus hoffmannseggi Armadillidium vulgare P a r c e l 11o s c a b e r

Pill Millipede

Steve particularly mentioned the synanthropic centipede, C r y p t o p s anomalans as not common in our area; it is nationally a Notable B species, occurring in less than 100 10km squares. We also made a brief excursion to the Wendover Arm of the Grand Union Canal at Stable Bridge (SP888114), where Eric found the following rotifers: E u c h l a n i s d i l a t a t a Ehrb. 1832; a widely distributed 'hardy' species. Weed haunting, algal encrusted surfaces etc. T r i c h o t r i a t e t r a c t i s Ehrb. 1830; not common in the Aylesbury area. T . p o c i l l u m (0.F.MUller) 1786, is the common species locally. C e p h a l o d e l l a c a t e l l i n a (Milller 1 7 8 6 ) ; a very common, hardy species, worldwide distribution, including Antarctica. Appears in garden ponds, bowls and dishes outside.

As a botanical aside, we found very numerous dark golden-brown gelatinous masses of the stalked Diatom Cymbella (not Gomphonema as stated at the meeting of 17th October 1992) adhering to sticks and stones on the bed of the canal. These were easily visible to the naked eye from the towpath. There are at least 15 British species, and these may have been masses of C . l a n c e o l a t a Ehrb., one of the largest and most abundant British species.

I gather from Martin that the evening moth-ing in Wendover Woods was very disappointing, primarily because the temperature dropped to nearly zero.

Nothing very exciting was turned up on the day but there were two species * swarming-n very large numbers - H y l e s i n u s f r a x i n i ( = L e p e r i s i n u s v a r i u s , Ash Bark Beetle) & B i b i o m a r c i (St Marks Fly). However, he has kindly provided the list below which is a compilation of records from Wendover Woods during 1992; those marked with an asterix were recorded on the day of the meeting: MOTHS

-

Drinker Scalloped Hook-tip* Oak Hook-tip Barred Hook-tip Chinese Character Buff Arches Large Emerald Clay Triple-lines Small Fan-footed Wave Riband Wave Red Twin-spot Carpet Dark-barred Twin-spot Carpet* Shaded Broad-bar Common Carpet Small Phoenix* Common Marbled Carpet Grey Pine Carpet* Spruce Carpet Broken-barred Carpet* Green Carpet* July Highflyer Small Rivulet Brindled Pug* Oak-tree Pug* Magpie Moth Clouded Border Scorched Carpet Tawny Barred-angle Brown Silver-line* Brimstone Moth* August Thorn Dusky Thorn Early Thorn Scalloped Hazel* Scalloped Oak Peppered Moth Waved Umber* Willow Beauty Satin Beauty Mottled Beauty Engrailed Small Engrailed* Common White Wave Clouded Silver Light Emerald Elephant Hawk Pebble Prominent Coxcomb Prominent Pale Prominent

Philudoria potatoria Falcaria l a c e r t i n a r i a Drepana b i n a r i a Drepana c u l t r a r i a C i l i x glaucata Habrosyne p y r i t o i d e s Geomet r a papi l i o n a r i a Cycl ophora l i n e a r i a Idaea b i s e l a t a Idaea a v e r s a t a Xanthorhoe s p a d i c e a r i a Xanthorhoe f e r r u g a t a S c o t o p t e r y x chenopodiata Epirrhoe a1terna t a Ecliptopera silacea t a Chloroclysta trunca t a Thera o b e l i s c a t a Thera b r i t a n n i c a Electrophaes corylata Col o s t y g i a p e c t i n a t a r i a Hydri omena f urca t a Perizoma a l c h e m i l l a t a Eupi t h e c i a a b b r e v i a t a Eupi t h e c i a dodonea t a Abraxas g r o s s u l a r i a t a Lomaspilis marginata Ligdia adusta t a Semiothisa l i t u r a t a Petrophora chl o r o s a t a Opisthograptis luteolata Ennomos q u e r c i n a r i a Ennomos f u s c a n t a r i a Selenia dentaria Odontopera b i d e n t a t a Crocallis elinguaria Biston betularia Menophra a b r u p t a r i a P e r i ba t o d e s rhomboidaria Deil eptenia ribea t a A1 c i s repanda t a Ectropis bistortata EctropiS crepuscularia Cabera p u s a r i a Lomographa t emera t a Campaea m a r g a r i t a t a Deilephila elpenor El igmodon t a z i c z a c P t i l odon capucina Pterostoma p a l p i n a

Marbled Brown* Pale Tussock* Yellow-tail Dingy Footman Scarce Footman * Buff Footman Common Footman Ruby Tiger Least Black Arches* Turnip Moth Large Yellow Underwing Lesser Yellow Underwing Setaceous Hebrew Character Hebrew Character* Smoky Wainscot Black Rustic Flounced Chestnut Brown-spot Pinion Centre-barred Sallow Lunar Underwing Straw Underwing Slender Brindle Frosted Orange Uncertain Rustic Nut-tree Tussock* & ab. Snout Fan-foot *

Drymonia dodona ea C a l l i t e a r a pudibunda E u p r o c t i S s i m i liS Eilema g r i s e o l a Eilema complana Eilema d e p l a n a Eilema l u r i d e o l a Phragma t o b i a f u l i g i n o s a Nola c o n f u s a l i s A g r o t i s segetum Noctua pronuba Noctua comes X e s t i a c-nigrum Orthosia gothica Mythimna impura Aporophyla n i g r a A g r o c h o l a h e 1v o l a A g r o c h o l a l i t ura Atethmia centrago O m p h a l o s c e l i S l unosa T h a l p o p h i l a ma t ura Apamea s c o l opa c i n a Gortyna f l a v a g o Hoplodrina a 1 s i n e s Hop1 o d r i n a b l a n d a Col oca s i a c o r y l i Hypena p r o b o s c i d a l i s Herminea t a r s i p e n n a l i s

MICROMOTHS Adela reamurella* Cal o p t i l i a s y r i n g e l l a Argyresthia goedart e l l a Plutella xylostella* Carcina quercana E p i n o t i a brunnichana E p i b l ema uddmanniana Pleuroptya r u r a l i s E n d o t r i c h a fl ammeali S Euzophera p i n g u i s

Diamond Backed Moth Bramble Shoot Moth Mother of Pearl

BUTTERFLIES Brimstone* Large White* Small White* Orange Tip* Peacock* Speckled Wood*

G o n e p t e r y x rhamni Pieris brassicae P i e r i s rapae Anthocharis cardamines Inachis i o Parage a e g e r i a

COLEOPTERA Carabus v i o l a c e u s * Nicrophorus i n t e r r u p t u s

Violet ground beetle

Necrodes l i t t o r a l i s Aphodi u s r u f i p e s Me1 o l o n t h a me1 01 ontha* Thana simus formi c a r i us* Rhagium b i f a s c i a t u m " Leperi s i n u s varius*

May Bug Ant beetle Ash bark beetle

DERMAPTERA Forficula auricularia* ,,

Common Earwig

DIPTERA B i b i o marci* Bombylius major*

St Marks Fly Bee Fly

CHILOPODA L i t h o b i u s v a r i ega t us* L

ARACHNIDA Enoplogna tha ova t a

All in all, we had a very productive and enjoyable day, and I look forward to this year's meeting at Halton and hope that it is a little more successful for moths 1 Kate Hawkins (with notes on Odonata by Julian Scott)

RARE WEEVIL HALTS WORK AT ENGLISH NATURE OFFICE "Work came to a halt at the Newbury offices of English Nature (England's official nature conservation body) when workmen repairing a rotten floor uncovered a thriving colony of rare weevils. W

The weevils, no more than 4 millimetres in length, were identified by resident entomologist Dr Keith Porter who confirmed that they were Pentarthrum h u t t o n i - a 'Red Data Book' species found in fewer than one hundred 10 kilometre squares in Britain. The floor had been damaged by flood water some years ago, but the severity of the damage was not realised until recently, when it was decided that it needed to be replaced. It was found that wet rot fungus had set in and the weevils had then colonised the timbers, where they fed on the fungus. The timbers have now been carefully removed and stacked in the grounds of the office so that the colony can continue to exist and so that normal work can start again." Jonathan Spencer sent through the above English Nature press release in

February of last year.

NOTE ON THE MICRO-FAUNA OF AN ANCIENT FONT IN THE CHURCHYARD NEAR THE TOWER OF WENDOVER PARISH CHURCH

November 24th 1992: The old stone font held about four inches of water and a small quantity of decayed moss. Two small tubes were filled with the water and a small amount of the decayed moss. On examination a few hours later under the microscope, Arthur Barren and I found two species of rotifer, a primitive ciliated worm of a type thought to be closelyrelated to Rotifera and two species of a micro crustacean belonging to a group known as the Ostracoda. The most numerous rotifer was one that we had fully expected to find in this situation, P h i l o d i n a r o s e o l a Ehrb. Although Ehrenberg's name dates from 1832, this is one of the first rotifers of which we have a recognisable description and figure, these being provided by the great Dutch pioneer microscopist Antoni van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723) who found this species abundant in his gutters in 1687. It is commonly found in birdbaths and indeed in any situation where water is present for a very short time, and is capable of withstanding being dried for very long periods or being encased in ice. Less numerous was the rotifer C e p h a l o d e l l a g i b b a (Ehrb. 1838). An inhabitant of small ponds, both amongst marginal weeds and in the open water, this species is not commonly found in such small quantities of water as in this font. It has a world-wide distribution and is known from the Antarctic. Rotifers are thought to have evolved from a primitive microscopic worm called a turbellarian to which they are certainly closely related. Whereas the rotifers swim by microscopic hairs or cilia located around the area of the mouth, turbellarians are clothed with rows of vibrating cilia all over the body surface, and swim about swiftly by this means. The turbellarians numerous in the font resembled a genus known as M i c r o s t o m u m although members of this genus are usually said to be parasitic on Hydra. Those in the font were all actively free swimming and no Hydra were observed. Their shape did not accord with that of the closely related Macrostomum. The largest organisms in the font were just visible to the naked eye, and appeared to be a small species of ostracod, a micro crustacean devoid of a head and completely enclosed in a bivalve case or carapace, from which various limbs protrude, but it is by means of branched antennae protruding from the front of the carapace that the animal swims vigorously about. Identification is extremely difficult in this group, and requires careful dissection under the microscope. The ostracods are distantly related to D a p h n i a , the so-called and well known "Waterflea". February 10th 1993: A further sample taken from this habitat revealed the presence in some numbers of a most remarkable rotifer, R o t a r i a n e p t u n i a (Ehrb. ) , the thinnest known rotifer in relation to its length. Although fully extended it can measure up to 1,060 pm (l.6mm), its greatest breadth is only about 50 pm! It is a bdelloid rotifer, belonging to the same group as P h i l o d i n a r o s e o l a which was

Key to illustration of the "Font Faunan from Wendover Parish Churchyard. Note: The drawings are not to scale. Fig.A - (approx'lmm) A turbellarian worm which swims with cilia. The species figured is M i c r o s t o m sp. Those in the font closely resembled this species. The figure sh0ws.a chain of four individuals. Fig.B - (0.25mm) The rotifer Cephalodella g i b b a . Turbellaria, rotifers swim with cilia on the head.

Closely related to the

Fig.C - (approx 0.5mm) The bdelloid (leech-like) rotifer Philodina roseola. A common inhabitant of birdbaths and gutters. Can withstand drying and freezing conditions. Swims by means of cilia but also creeps like a leech. Fig.D - (2mm) An ostracod. A small crustacean completely enclosed in a bivalve shell with only the swimming antennae and one or two limbs protruding from the opening between the two halves of the shell. The species in the font was very similar to that depicted.

still present. Cephalodella gibba which was present in the November sample was not refound. The turbellarian worm present in November was absent on February 10th. but considerable numbers of the ciliated protozoan Paramecium were in evidence as well as another unidentified ciliate which might be a species of Colpidium. The Ostracoda found in November were still present in about the same numbers. A single tardigrade or Water Bear was also found on this visit. Eric Hollowday

ENTOMOLOGICAL FIELD-GUIDES FOR THE GENERALIST With the prominent exception of butterflies (the large range of field-guides for which I will leave to someone else to evaluate), it is not a simple matter for the non-specialist to identify insects reliably in the field. This is due to a combination of difficulties pertaining both to the subjects of study and to the tools available to identify them. The subjects of study naturalist. Either they or or

are (a) (b) (c)

peculiarly inconsiderate of the needs of the fly away as soon as you notice them all look the same are too small to see anyway

They are also highly contrary. Go to a motel room in the Nevada desert and keep your suitcase tightly closed and locked at all times. When you get home it will be packed with large cockroaches. Enter the kitchens of the same motels where these cockroaches are scurrying all over the walls and floors and just try inviting one of them into your specimen bottle. The entomologist must learn to live with these problems. The problems with identification guides, however, are largely man-made. There is a tendency to opt for striking illustrations of gaudy species that turn out to be extremely rare and unlikely to be encountered, or maybe not known in Britain at all. This may help sell books to an uninformed beginner, but it is extremely annoying in use, as you flick through page after page of, say, continental longhorn beetles. Even worse is the correlative tendency to picture more likely finds without any indication of how many species actually look like that. While the illustration will be labelled as one particular species, you cannot know how many similar ones are not illustrated, or how they differ. Another common annoyance is variable scale - so that large species are reduced to get more on a page and small ones enlarged for visibility, obscuring an important visual aid to identification. In the end, of course, reliable identification to species level will usually imply resort to a key and will demand time and patience, both on the part of the entomologist and of the bug. The trouble with the average key is that one is liable to go some way through readily noticeable macro-features only to stumble on a crucial choice based on the shape of a single tarsal hair, demanding a x50 microscope. The hair will usually be hidden behind a craftily positioned claw, in any case. (An example of this is the standard key for capsid bugs in Southwood and Leston, 1959, when one cannot even separate the main sub-families without it). In general, field-guides are either easy to use but unreliable for identifying species, lacking complete coverage (often with no indication of how complete they are), or complete and reliable, but demanding more time than is available in the field. In almost all groups of insects there are some species that cannot be told apart in the field, so that ultimately one will have to rely, in many cases, on specimens caught and preserved for more leisurely study. Nevertheless, there are a surprising number of larger insects (say, above 5 or 10mm) that can readily be told on sight, if one has the knowledge or an adequate guide. The guides that I have found helpful, by group, are as follows.

I

Odonata Hanunond (1977). There is a later updated edition. The book has large, clear pictures of all British species, but the downside is that it is A4 size and so difficult to carry around. Particular identifying features are enlarged

and colourlpattern variations illustrated with the main pictures. Given the relatively small number of damsel- and dragon-flies, this is a feasible group to get to know with this text. Ephemeroptera Barker (1989). This is one of the excellent little paperbacks in the Naturalists* Handbooks series. I have not yet had my copy long enough to be able to comment on its ease of use in the field, but it certainly would be possible to make complete identifications, as microscopic features are (necessarily) used in the key. Some mayflies can be recognised with practice as anglers have long known - but certainly not all. Orthoptera Brown (1983). Naturalists' Handbook no. 2. This covers all British grasshoppers (Acrididae) and bush crickets (Tettigoniidae). The coloured illustrations look distinct enough, but the colour variations in the field make them very difficult to use in-practice. The details in the keys are a little brief, and I find that I have to check with the RES key (Hincks, 1949) in many cases.

-

Better for local entomologists is Paul (1989). This covers all Orthoptera occurring in the BBONT region. The geographical restriction reduces the complexity and allows for more details to be included. All species are illustrated by hand drawings (black and white), and there is a key included (although in such small type that it is a strain to read). The number of local species is very limited, so it is easier to learn the major features and then check with the full descriptions. This is certainly a feasible guide to use in the field once one has some familiarity with the subject. Heteroutera Southwood & Leston (1959). An essential text which has no rival, and also small enough for the pocket (it is one of the Wayside and Woodland volumes) but frustrating to use in the field, as the plates (only half in colour) are distributed throughout the text. Even if one finds an illustration that seems identical to one's specimen, moreover, it may not be the only species with those characteristics. The keys are generally good, with some vagueness on occasion, and some difficult features (as I mentioned in the introduction), but are certainly too complex for use in the field. Savage (1989). This covers aquatic species only. It is an excellent text, with efficient keys, but it is not feasible to identify most aquatic bugs in the field. So this book is for the study only. Leuidoutera As I said, I will not attempt to comment on the wealth of books on butterflies, except to say that despite the huge range I have not found one that is wholly satisfactory. As for macro moths, I am very glad to be able to leave South (1961) on the shelf (it has served well), now that Skinner (1984) is available. Again, this is not a pocket book, but given the large number of species to be covered, many rather alike (the average drab noctuid or the little pugs for instance), the book manages to be about as easy to use as is possible. Micro-moths are not so well served, the huge multi-million pound standard reference texts excluded. Beirne (1954) - South's companion in the old Wayside and Woodland series - was a brave attempt for its time, but seriously needs updating and the plates are awful. And then it only covers pyralids, and there seems to be no accessible text at all for the tortricids, some of which are colourful and readily identifiable in the field. Diptera As a whole order the flies are, of course, quite hopeless for the generalist. One fungus-gnat looks like any other fungus-gnat, and there are at least 500 of them in Britain1 Nevertheless there are families that can be tackled, although the only one for which there are popular field guides is the

Syrphidae (hoverflies). The clear choice for me of those available is Stubbs and Falk (1983; reprintedwith an appendix 1986). Clear colour plates, grouped together at the end, show all major variations and can be used alone to identify a good many species, although a few pictures could accord with more than one. There- is a good key and a short description of every species, although fuller descriptions in Verrall (1901) are useful for dubious identifications. A little large for the pocket again, but you can carry it around, and it is less frustrating in use than most other entomological guides. Hymenoptera Hymenopterists, unfortunately, are poorly served. Not even bees have a practical guide. The old Wayside and Woodlands volume covering the whole order is quite inadequate. The social wasps, few in number, are covered well in some more general texts, such as Chinery (1973)' and the only group adequately covered by popular texts is the bumblebees. I have used Alford (1973). but find it difficult to use in the field, partly because there are no plates, partly because there are several pairs of very similar species that need close study to separate. More recently ~ris- ones and Corbet (1987) has appeared in the Naturalists' Handbooks series, and this is better. Different forms for queens, males and workers complicate this group. Nevertheless, they are common and conspicuous and it should be possible to master this group. A particularly useful guide, although not easily obtainable, is the poster given away with BBC Wildlife a few months ago. It has the same illustrations as the last book, but logically grouped according to appearance and all on one page. Textual notes accompany each picture. Coleoptera The size of this order is daunting, but there are many species that are immediately identifiable and they are not as a whole so mobile as the Diptera and Hymenoptera. One field guide gives reasonable results for the whole order, although to genus rather than species. This is Harde (1984), easy to use with large clear colour pictures of one representative of just about every genus represented in Britain. The main drawback is that it attempts to cover the whole of central and northern Europe, making many of the illustrations redundant. This is overcome to some extent by placing asterisks by those genera present in Britain in the text facing each plate. It still means that the book is bulkier than it need have been. To tackle beetles at species level one obviously needs to specialise in particular groups. Three are decently served at present to my knowledge. The best of these is Majerus and R e a m s (1989) on the ladybirds (Coccinellidae), which is complete for British species, including the few that do not look immediately like ladybirds. There are good colour plates which will serve to identify many specimens and two keys, one brief for use in the field, and the other more systematic. These are not at all bad, but not infallible in the face of major pattern variations within several species. The book is just the right size for portability. (One can also buy the plates from this book separately in the form of cards). For the longhorns there is Hickin (1987). which I have not owned-long enough to try out. There is no key, but most species can readily be told apart by appearance. The main drawbacks are that coverage is far from complete (about two-thirds of native species being mentioned), it is not systematic, and there is no index. Lacking anything better, however, one could probably manage fairly well with it. Another recent acquisition is Forsythe (1987), on ground beetles. It has complete coverage in the keys, admitting that some pairs are not separable without microscopic examination. It claims to provide reliable identification

of all the commoner Carabidae. It would appear to be of the same high standard as the other texts in the Naturalists' Handbooks series. Other invertebrates I find Jones (1983) an easy-to-use guide to the spiders, with excellent colour photographs. It covers all those species that can be identified in the field, except for a few very rare ones not occurring in Bucks. The little linyphiids are sensibly omitted. The text opposite to the pictures is the most appropriate layout for a pictorial guide. Sutton (1972) is an excellent work on the woodlice, although not a field guide. It has complete keys, but only a few species illustrated in colour. Given the,,limitednumber of British species, it is a group more people could study

.

For land snails there are Ellis (1.926) and Kerney and Cameron (1979). The former has black and white photos and very full text (in old-fashioned style and not easy to use). The latter has coloured and black-and-white drawings, but is short on text. While the former covers British molluscs only, the second covers the whole of Northwest Europe, considerably increasing the range of species and adding to the slowness of identification. Neither is therefore perfect as a field guide, which is a shame, because most British non-marine molluscs can be readily identified on sight. '

Although slugs are included in both the above, they are much easier to identify with Cameron, Jackson and Eversham (1983)'s slim "field key", which has good coloured illustrations and is restricted to British species. It is, in fact, a reprint from the "Field Studies" journal, published by the field Studies Council in the AIDGAP series, with the addition of illustrations taken from Kerney and Cameron (1979). Conclusion Most entomological field-guides will have limitations because of the nature of their subject-matter, compared to those for flowers for instance. There is still plenty of room for improvement on what is currently on offer, however. Most commercial field-guides are insufficiently geared to the exigencies of fieldwork - speed and the primacy of particular visual clues - and tend to have too wide a coverage - county-wide is better than countrywide certainly preferable to European. Of course, this comes up against commercial factors such as viable sales. One way round this is to construct one's own pictorial keys, as I have been experimenting with - but that is another tale. REFERENCES

+

Alford, D.V. (1973) Bumblebee Distribution Maps Scheme; guide t o the B r i t i s h species. London (Bee Research Association).

.

Beirne, B.P. (1954) B r i t i s h Pyralid and Plume Moths. London (Warne)

Brown, V.K. (1983) Grasshoppers. Cambridge (Cambridge University Press). Cameron, R.A.D., Jackson, N. & Eversham, B. (1985) A f i e l d Key t o the Slugs o f the B r i t i s h I s l e s . Taunton (Field Studies Council). Chinery, M. (1973) Insects o f Britain and Northern Europe. London (Collins). Forsythe, T .G. (1987) Common Ground Beetles. Slough (Richmond Publishing Co. )

.

Hammond, C.O. (1977) Dragonflies o f Great Britain & Ireland. London (Curwen).

Harde, K.W. (1984) A Field Guide i n Colour t o B e e t l e s . London (Octopus). Harker, J. (1989) Mayflies. Slough (Richmond Publishing Co.). Hickin, N. (1987) Longhorn B e e t l e s o f t h e B r i t i s h I s l e s . Aylesbury (Shire). Hincks, W.D. (1949) Dermaptera & Orthoptera. London (Royal Entomological Society of London). Jones , D. (1983) Country L i f e Guide t o Spiders o f B r i t a i n and Northern Europe. Feltham (Country Life Books). Kerney, M.P. & Cameron, R.A.D. (1979) A Field guide t o t h e Land s n a i l s o f B r i t a i n & Northwest Europe. London (Collins). Majerus, M. & Kearns, P. (1989) Ladybirds. Slough (Richmond Publishing Co.).

.

( 1989) Grasshoppers & C r i c k e t s o f Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire. Oxford (Pisces).

Paul, J

~rys-~ones ,

0.E. & Corbet , S .A. (1987) University Press).

Bumblebees.

Cambridge (Cambridge

Savage, A.A. (1989) Adults o f t h e B r i t i s h Aquatic Hemiptera Heteroptera. Ambleside (Freshwater Biological Association). Skinner, B. (1984) Colour I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Guide t o Moths o f t h e B r i t i s h I s l e s . London (Warne). South, R. (1961) The Moths o f t h e B r i t i s h I s l e s . London (Warne). Southwood, T.R.E. & Leston, D. (1959) Land & Water Bugs o f t h e B r i t i s h I s l e s . London (Warne). Stubbs, A.E. & Falk, S.J. (1983) B r i t i s h Entomological & Natural History Society). Sutton, S.L. (1972) Woodlice. London (Ginn

&

Hoverflies.

London (British

Co.).

Verrall, G.H. (1901; reprinted 1963) B r i t i s h F l i e s , Vol V I I I : Plateypezidae, Pipunculidae & Syrphidae o f Great B r i t a i n . Hampton (E.W.Classey Ltd.). Tony F. Marshall

WRc FEDMENHAM AND HOMEFIELD WOOD

-

18.7.1992

The few people that attended this meeting visited the grounds of WRc Medmenham (SU804839) in the morning. The site has a range of habitats, some of which are now being managed to improve their value for wildlife. The most interesting area was that of old water meadow with water filled drainage ditches and a rich flora. The following were some of the more interesting moth species noted; Lesser Cream Wave ( Scopula immuta t a ) ; Balsam Carpet (Xanthorhoe b i r i v i a t a ) - recorded at light - a Red Data Book species; Dingy Shell (Euchoeca n e b u l a t a ) ; & mines of two micros, P h y l l o c n i s t i s saligna on willow and P.unipunctella on poplar.

Various dragonflies were present in a pool created only a few years previously and from which a large Dytiscid beetle and the water stick insect (Ranatra linearis) were obtained. Homefield Wood (SU81-86-), owned by the Forestry Commission and part managed by BBONT is mainly coniferous and beech (young) plantation plus a small chalk grassland bank and was the afternoon and evening venue. White-letter Hairstreaks (Strymondea W-album) and very young larvae of the Striped Lychnis moth were the highlights of the afternoon. The latter is nationally rare, with South Bucks being the stronghold, as previously reported in the newsletter. Moth trapping produced 87 macromoth species, including the following; Balsam Carpet (Xanthorhoe biriviata) rather unexpected in this habitat; Beautiful Carpet (Mesoleuca albiciliata); Haworth' S Pug (Eupithecia haworthiata) ; Blomer's Rivulet (Discoloxia blomeri) ; Clouded Magpie (Abraxas sylvata); Satin Beauty (Deileptenia ribeata); Maple Prominent (Ptilodontella cucullina); Black Arches (Lysaantria monacha); Coronet (Craniophora ligustri); and Waved Black (Parascotia fuliginaria) Also of note were many of the very local mayfly Ephemera lineata.

.

Martin Albertini

L

ON THE OCCURRENCE IN BUCKINGHAMSHIRE OF THE COLONIAL PERITRICHOUS CILIATE (PROTOZOA) OPHRYDIDM VERSATILE (M@LLER ) Colonies of this ciliated protozoan, whose possession of cilia round the oral rim place it in the sub-class Peritricha, are visible to the naked eye as roughly spherical masses of green jelly adhering to the stems and leaves of water plants (fig.1) and occasionally on the surface of submerged stones etc. (Winkler & Corliss, 1965; Patterson & Hedley, 1992) and sometimes floating freely .

I first noticed these green globular masses on the stems and leaves of the pondweed Potamogeton natans in the now long vanished Hartwell clay pits, (approximately one and a half kilometres S.W. of Aylesbury and bordering the A418 opposite Hartwell Park), in the summer of 1942. Some were as large as a tennis ball, although many a little smaller at golf ball size. Some colonies tended to be more ovoid than spherical, and occasionally one found quite large masses floating freely, usually ragged and torn open. In these latter examples, it was noticeable that the bright green colour was confined to the outer surface of the jelly, the inner portion being of a brownish to grey colour. Examination under the medium powers of a compound microscope showed the green colour to be due to the presence of thousands of peritrichous protozoans each containing many hundreds of zoochlorellae, a bright yellowish to green alga often found as a symbiote in animal organisms, (e.g. the ciliated protozoan Stentor viridis, one species of the freshwater coelenterates Chlorohydra viridissima, the platyhelminth Dalyellia and several rotiferS ) . When the colony was left undisturbed in a dish under the microscope for a few minutes, the zooids extended to length of some 3 5 0 (figs.3 ~ & 6). their oral cilia causing a noticeable vortex in the water. Any slight disturbance would cause most or all of the zooids to suddenly contract into their protective jelly sheaths, assuming a length of approximately 8 0 p (fig.7). Bick (1972) gives a fully extended length of up to 6 0 0 ~ .

EXPLANATION OF PLATE (g., gullet; lc., locomotory (aboral) cilia; inn., macro-nucleus; Oph.col., Ophrydium colonies; oc., oral cilia; S., stalk; su., support; sz., symbiotic zoochlorellae; t., telotroch) Fig.1 - Colonies of Uphrydiim attached to stems and leaves of Potamogeton na tans. ,,

Fig.2

- Two colonies detached from a - Medium power view of park

Fig.3 (feeding). Fig.4

-

plant, approx. half natural size. of a colony showing zooids extended

A small colony drawn from life, showing free-swimming telotrochs.

Fig.5 - Diagrammatic representation showing gullet, macronucleus and branching stalks resulting from longitudinal fission. Fig.6 b

Fig.7

-

Fully extended specimen. Drawn from life. Contracted specimen. Drawn from life.

Fig.8 Specimen about to undergo transverse fission to produce a telotroch, oral cilia withdrawn. Drawn from life. Fig.9 - Newly separated telotroch showing posterior (aboral) circlet of swimming cilia. Drawn from life. Fig.10 - Telotroch shortly before settlement, showing reappearance of oral cilia. Drawn from life. Fig.ll - Newly settled telotroch, oral cilia extended, posterior (aboral) swimming cilia still retained. Drawn from life. Figs.12 Fig.14

-

-

&

13

-

Mature zooids in typical feeding positions. Drawn from life.

Individual contracted about to go undergo longitudinal fission.

Fig.15 Two individuals resulting from longitudinal fission of the specimen shown in fig.14. Oral cilia extended but final separation not completed. Fig.16 - A small colony of six individuals. These are migratory zooids which have left the original colony and attached themselves to a piece of floating debris. Sources: Figs.1, 4 , 6, 7, 8, 9 , 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 & 15 drawn from living specimens by the author (Hartwell specimens, 1944, published in Hollowday, 1975); Fig.5 from Bick (1972); Figs.2,3 & 16, photomicrographs by A.V.Dodge (from Dodge, 1982).

Reference to the literature revealed that these were in fact colonies of the peritrichous ciliate Ophrydium versatile (MUller) of which a dozen species are recognised world-wide. It was later noticed at Hartwell that the large colonies attached to the Potamogeton disintegrated and disappeared during the autumn, but 'overwintering' colonies about a centimetre in diameter were found adhering to the dead stems of Fontinalis and occasionally to the cases of caddis larvae. Biology of Ophryditim: The presence of the zoochlorellae in the cytoplasm of the protozoan is a true case of symbiotic partnership; the alga has not been swallowed as food; indeed the food of Ophrydium is probably largely bacterial. The mutual advantage of the association doubtless arises from the assimilation by the alga of waste CO; from the protozoan, and the replenishment of the latter's Oy by the photosynthetic activities of the former. Movement of the zoochlorellae within the protozoan is discernable due to the streaming of the latter's cytoplasm. Establishment of newcolonies: Colonies can expand by longitudinal fission of individual zooids (figs.14 & 15). The oral cilia are withdrawn prior to fission (fig.14). but reappear before the division and separation of the resulting pair is complete (fig.15). But during the summer, new colonies are continually being established by either migratory zooids, or asexually produced telotrochs (figs.8, 9, 10 & 11). These are produced by transverse fission (fig.8). The oral cilia are withdrawn, and separation of the upper portion from the lower occurs about a third of the way down from the anterior end. Additional cilia appear just above the point of division (fig.10). these being strong swimming or locomotory cilia withwhich the newly formed organism swims away (lower end first), finally settling on some suitable surface on which a new colony can be established (fig.ll). The oral cilia sometimes reappear before the free-swimming telotroch comes to rest (fig.10). and are fully functional again shortly after settlement, but the posterior locomotory cilia may still persist for several hours (fig.11), eventua-lly being reabsorbed. The new colony may then expand by the afore-mentioned longitudinal fission. Under the microscope, it is frequently noticed that the telotrochs may settle on the underneath of the surface film and this may occur in nature, but the floating colonies sometimes found seem to have been dislodged from submerged supports and are frequently ruptured. While under observation in dishes or micro-aquaria, it is known for ordinary zooids to detach themselves from the colony, breaking away from their anchoring stalks (fig.5), and swimming by means of the oral cilia. In this condition they would almost certainly be likely to contact a new support 'head downwards' as the ciliary action draws them forward through the water, and it is doubtful whether successful establishment on a new support could be effected in this manner. It is significant that the telotrochs withdraw the oral (or anterior) cilia and develop a posterior circlet of swimming cilia, thus ensuring that they settle the 'right way up' (i.e. posterior end downward on the new support). Winkler & Corliss (ibid) have however observed some of the migratory adult zooids to also develop the aboral or posterior circlet of swimming cilia which, presumably, being stronger than the oral or buccal cilia, ensures the zooid settles posterior end downwards to the new support. Each zooid develops a long slender stalk from the point of attachment (fig.5), this being extremely transparent, and not easy to see, and indeed I have never observed it myself, but Dodge (1982) found that mounting portions of the colony in glycerine jelly (Glycerol) enhanced their visibility, as also does phase contrast which I do not possess.

Ecology and occurrence in Bucks: Ophrydium appears to be rather uncommon, although usually abundant where it occurs. Following the loss of the Hartwell habitat during the 1950's, I did not find it again until August 1977 when quite large colonies of it were observed floating at the margin of a gravel pit at Fulmer, near Gerrards Cross in the south of the county. It appears to flourish in large clear ponds such as clay and gravel pits. Records outside the county are from the Long Water at Hampton Court, a lake between Cobham and Ripley in Surrey, a lake at Rickmansworth, Herts, Kelby Bridge, Leicestershire and Aberystwyth, mid Wales. Bick ( i b i d ) quotes Liebmann (1962) who apparently considered Ophrydium to be an indicator of oligotrophic conditions, (i.e. water which is poor in nutritive material, some lakes in the Lake District being classified under this heading) , but Hartwell pits were certainly not of this type, being highly eutrophic (i.e. water rich in nutritive material). Kolkwitz (1950) reported Ophrydium from alpha-mesosaprobic habitats, the latter being only one grade up from grossly polluted waters. Here again this does not accord with my observations at Hartwell and Fulmer, nor with those of correspondents who have found it at the other places mentioned. (For an explanation of the classification of aquatic habitats under the Saprobity [Saprobiotic] System [Gk. Sapros, rotten, b i o s , life] see Bick, 1972). Noland (1959) mentioned twelve species of Ophrydium and it may well be that different species are adapted to different levels of nutrient content, purity and pollution etc. L

REFERENCES Bick, H. (1972) C i l i a t e d Protozoa. An i l l u s t r a t e d guide t o t h e s p e c i e s used a s b i o l o g i c a l i n d i c a t o r s i n freshwater biology. Geneva (World Health Organisation) 198pp. Dodge, A.V. (1982) Some observations on Ophrydium v e r s a t i l e . Microscopy, 1 plate.

34(5):381-384, -

Hollowday, E.D. (1975) Some notes on an uncommon colonial peritrichous protozoan, Ophrydium v e r s a t i l e ( 0 .F.MUller) Microscopy, 32(12) :503-511, 3 plates.

.

Kolkwitz, R. (1950) Okologie der Saprobein. Schr. Reihe ver Wass. Boden. U. Lufthyg. 4. Liebmann, H. (1962) Handbuch der Frischwasser und Abwasser Biologic Edn., Munich (Oldenbourg).

1.2nd

Noland, L.E. (1959) in Freshwater Biology. Ward, M.B. & Whipple, G.E., 2nd Edn. (Edmondson, W.T., ed.). New York (John Wiley & Sons) & London (Chapman & Hall) 1248pp. Patterson, D.J. & Hedley, S. (1992) Free-living Freshwater Protozoa. London (Wolfe) 223pp. Winkler, R.H. & Corliss, J.O. (1965) Notes on the rarely described green Protozoon Ophrydium v e r s a t i l e (0.F.MUller). Trans.Amer.Mcrosc.Soc. , &:127137, 1 plate. (This publication includes a much more extensive bibliography). Eric Hollowday

URBAN INVERTEBRATES FORUM

English Nature produce a quarterly journal called Urban Wildlife News, in the most recent issue of which an invertebrate forum was mooted. The editor of UWN, George Barker, writes: T h e Urban Invertebrates Forum has arisen ...from a meeting which David Sheppard and I convened here [English Nature HQ at Peterborough] in April. The next step will be tidying up and issuing the notes of that meeting. I am ashamed to say that I have not yet done this. This will act as the trigger I hope for a second seminar to explore further what is being done and what most urgently needs to be done in the field of study. One of the questions which should be addressed is whether existing organisations/networks can be used by those working in the field to exchange information and raise the profile of studies of invertebrate ecology in urban areas or whether some new mechanisms are needed. We are not trying to push people along roads that they do not want to travel. However it is clear that the true urban habitats may have unevaluated resources of wildlife which we need to take account of in our work. Further there are invertebrate assemblages which would repay study in terms of their development and origins. There are more than a few suggestions that site evaluation based on botanical data alone is nowhere entirely satisfactory and especially so in urban habitats - the invertebrates may be very valuable in monitoring change and in evaluating sites. Given this we were exploring whether those already working on invertebrates in urban habitats would welcome English Nature trying to give some better focus and whether we can in so doing suggest new areas of study which would stimulate those not currently involved to become so. We are, in other words, acting as facilitators. Whether the Forum arises and becomes established is very much in the court of those actively involved in the work being discussed.* We shall keep in contact with developments of this Forum at the Museum, but if any Group member personally wishes to know more George ark er can be contacted at English Nature, Northminster House, Peterborough, PE1 lUA, 0 7 3 3 340345.

MILLIPEDES IN BUCKINGHAMSHIRE (USING BURNHAM BEECHES AS AN EXAMPLE)

Millipedes are frequently overlooked animals but they are very common and can be discovered very easily in a variety of situations. Whilst preferring humid conditions they are also found in quite dry places and are often seen around houses and in gardens. There are 52 species recorded from Britain but, allowing for the few which are only found on the coast or in very restricted localities, the fauna of Buckinghamshire should be quite manageable. Millipedes differ from centipedes in having two pairs of legs per body segment, hence Diplopoda. In addition, millipedes are generally slow moving and detritivores, feeding on decaying leaves and wood, whereas the centipedes are carnivores and can deliver a sharp nip. Millipedes never bite but they do produce a defensive secretion from glands along the body. The secretions are very variable in composition but may contain benzoquinones, cyanide or a substance identified from millipedes Glomerin, depending on the species. Most cause yellow brown stains on the hands when the millipedes are handled

roughly. Nearly all millipedes have an exoskeleton impregnated with calcium and thus prefer habitats where calcium is available. Burnham Beeches is very acidic, situated on the gravels of the Reading Beds, but even so 19 species have been recorded so far including a couple of interesting ones. Hunting for the animals can be easily done just by turning logs and stones. Sieving of soil and leaf litter can be useful for collecting smaller species and juveniles. One of the species from the Beeches has only been found in pitfall traps which is another useful method. Most peoples' idea of a millipede is a long cylindrical animal, the so-called 'snake millipedes' but they do come in a variety of shapes so assigning an individual to an order is fairly straightforward. Of the 6 orders found in Britain 5 are recorded from Buckinghamshire (the remaining one has only been found in Kent) and they are all quite characteristic. The tiny (2-3 mm) P o l y x e n u s l a g u r u s (order Polyxenida) is also known as the bristly millipede and looks very unlike most peoples' idea of a millipede (Figure a). It is usually found on walls and trees and is very often overlooked because of its small size.

-

G l o m e r i s m a r g i n a t a (order Glomerida) (Figure b) , the pill millipede is a common species which, as its name implies can roll into a ball. It is frequently found in leaf litter and strongly resembles A r m a d i l l i d i u m the pill woodlouse. The two can be distinguished when rolled up as in the millipede the telson or tail overlaps the head and the second segment appears like a strap (Figure c).

The snake millipedes (order Julida) (Figure d) are perhaps the most characteristic of the group. With the long cylindrical bodies and large numbers of legs they are very appealing animals. This group is well represented in Britain and some species are difficult to distinguish. The most frequently encountered is T a c h y p o d o i u l u s n i g e r which is black in colour with white legs. It is very active and is often seen in the evenings around houses as it is attracted to the lights. Swarms of this millipede occur occasionally and a related species introduced into Australia from Portugal is causing big problems as it 'swarms' into peoples' houses.

-U

The two rare species found in the Beeches are snake millipedes. One, C y l i n d r o i u l u s p a r i s i o r u m seems to be synanthropic (lives in association with man) on the continent (the type locality is the Catacombs in Paris) but in England I have found it more in association with large pieces of deciduous timber. The other species C h o n e i u l u s p a l m a t u s also has a tendency to be synanthropic. The flat backed millipedes (order Polydesmida) (Figure e) are very common but some of the species are difficult to distinguish without referring to the sex organs (which can be seen in this group without dissecting). The most common species Polydesmus a n g u s t u s (15-20 mm long) is found in many different habitats, particularly woodland, and seems to be able to live in quite acidic conditions. Hence it is the most common species in the Beeches. Brachydesmus s u p e r u s is smaller (8-10 mm), white and is frequently seen in gardens. The final order, the Chordeumatida, is less often encountered and, in body shape, is somewhat intermediate between the Julida and Polydesmida. Some species are more or less cylindrical with small bumps along the sides. The

L- of mandible

FIGURES a Polyxenus lagurus. b G1omeri S margina t a . c G l o m e r i s marginata 'rolled up'. d A snake millipede. e A flat backed millipede. f The head and first 7 segments of a male snake millipede of the genus Cylindroiul us. Scale bars

a-e

f

1.0mm 0.1mm

most common one has large paranota (lateral projections) and therefore appears flat backed like Polydesmus but has long setae along the back. It is also less heavily sclerotised and often appears rather 'softer' especially when preserved. Millipedes have very interesting life cycles. They hatch from the egg, via a very short lived,'pupoid' stage, into an animal with only three pairs of legs. At each moult more segments are added and also more legs. In the Polydesmida and Chordeumatida a standard maximum number of segments is reached at maturity. In the Glomerida and Polyxenida moulting continues after the maximum number is attained, up to maturity, but in later moults no segments are added. In the Julida the final number of segments is very variable and in some species (e.g. Tachypodoiulus niger) moulting and the associated addition of segments continues after the attainment of maturity. In these species more eyes are also added at each moult and it is possible to tell how many times the animal has moulted by the number of rows of eyes it has. Mature males can be distinguished by the absence of legs on segment 7. This can be seen in live animals as a 'gap' in the legs fairly close to the head. The missing legs are reformed internally as gonopods which are the intermittent organs for transferring sperm into the female. In the Julids the first pair of legs are modified into hooks which help to hold the female whilst mating. The cheek plate may also be expanded (Figure f). In some groups it is necessary to have mature males in order to determine the species. A few British species (e.g.Polyxenus and some of the snake millipedes) are parthenogenetic, thus males are very rare. When found, millipedes should be preserved in 70% alcohol or other suitable fluid. Pinning or drying is hopeless because the animals fall apart very easily and the gonopods also get distorted so they cannot be identified. Blower (1985) is the best key for identification of British species. There is also a British Myriapod Group which has a weekend field meeting each Spring and helps to co-ordinate millipede records in Britain. The millipede recording scheme has been running since 1971 so any records would be appreciated. I would be happy to help with any specimens people might have and/or confirm identification. REFERENCES Blower, J.G. (1985) Millipedes. Synopses of the British Fauna (New Series) no.35. E.J.Brill/Dr W.Backhuys, London, 242pp. Hopkin, S.P. & Read, H. J. (1992) The Biology of Millipedes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 233pp. Helen Read

NEW OXFORDSHIRE ORTHOPTERA The 1990s have seen the discovery of three species of orthoptera new to the modern Oxfordshire. This is the old Oxfordshire, vc23 and the northwest of Berkshire vc22, which together form the post 1974 administrative county of Oxfordshire. The three species involved are all known to be expanding their range, and

their eventual arrival in Oxfordshire was hoped for. It would seem probable that all three could also be present in Buckinghamshire, or could well appear in the next year or two. ROESEL'S BUSH CRICKET, Metrioptera roeselii. The first record of this bush cricket was from Little Wittenham Nature Reserve (vc22) in 1990, when a solitary specimen was caught and later released. A strong colony was found not far from the nature reserve in 1992. The only record from vc23 is of one near Shiplake during October 1991. LONG-WINGED CONE-HEAD. Conoceuhalus discolor. All of the records are from vc23 and for 1992. Specimens were found at the Hartslock reserve and Lower Shiplake, both in the south east of the county. A third site at Cowley Marsh, within the City of Oxford was also found. SHORT-WINGED CONE-HEAD. Conocephalus dorsalis. A strong colony was found on Otmoor, vc23, in September 1992. From the numbers present it is thought that the colony had been in existence for several years. John Campbell, Oxon B.R.C., County Museum, Woodstock, Oxon OX20 1SN. b

A NEW SPECIES OF GAMMARUS IN BRITAIN At a previous meeting of the Group Eric Hollowday reported the new species of Gammarus in Britain, namely Gannnarus tigrinus. been compiled very much with the help of Eric and Dr L.M.Bird of Region of the National Rivers Authority who is studying distribution of this alien species.

L

presence of a This note has the Yorkshire the national

Gammarus tigrinus appears to be native to the East Coast of America, and was probably introduced into Britain from the port of Liverpool, from where it has spread into a number of inland waterways such as the Rivers Trent, Idle and Don. In its native habitat, it is a saline species, but it is evident that in England it is now living in fresh as well as saline waters. The shrimp is, however, not new to Europe and is particularly widespread in Holland and Germany, where it was intentionally introduced into the River Weser to replace the native shrimps which had been eliminated by pollution. The more pollution tolerant American shrimp was imported to provide food for fish and has since thrived and spread to many areas. G. tigrinus was recently found for the first time in Yorkshire in the Stainforth and Keadby Canal and is apparently quite at home in a canal environment. Concerning the distinction between this newcomer .and our native Gammarus pulex, Dr Bird writes: "The line drawings on sheet 1...show the distinctive bluish stripes which run across the segments of G. tigrinus, and which are absent in G.pulex. G. tigrinus also has a more elongated eye than G.pulex, and in the breeding season (March to October), is much more 'hairy' than G.pulex. This is shown very clearly in the drawing on sheet 2, which was copied from the original British description by Sexton.

I find the two species very easy to tell apart when they are live, due to

SHEET 1

Gammarus tigrlnus

Gammarus pulex Â

SHEET 2

these distinctive bands on G.tigrinus. Some other estuarine shrimps such as G. z a d d a c h i , also have coloured S tripes on their dorsal segments, but these follow the divisions between segments, and are greenish in colour, whereas those on G.tigrinus are in the middle of the segments, and are bluish. Once the animals are preserved it is more difficult to differentiate the species, as they quickly lose their colour. I use the standard FBA key (A Key to the British Freshwater Crustacea:Malacostraca by T.Gledhil1, D.W.Sutcliffe and W.D.Williams, Scientific Publications of the Freshwater Biological Association No.32), and am generally able to separate larger specimens using this key. " To the best of my knowledge Gammarus tigrinus has not yet been recorded in Buckinghamshire but it does appear, at least in the Yorkshire area, to be spreading as it has done in mainland Europe. I would be interested to know if any Group members encounter this species in the future and will, of course, forward any records to Dr Bird. Julian Scott

LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND NATURE CONSERVATION Local authorities (LAs) have a key role to play in nature conservation. Agree, disagree or unsure? What follows is a brief outline of some of the responsibilities which LAs have, and initiatives which they might take, to promote wildlife conservation. The significant contribution which individual naturalists, as well as organisations such as BBONT, can make towards this process will also be highlighted. Various statutes and government circulars have included provisions empowering or encouraging LAs to promote nature conservation including the duty, under the Countryside Act 1968, "to have regard to the desirability of conserving the natural beauty and amenity of the countrysiden i.e. its flora, fauna, geological and physiological features. A bit of a woolly statement but at least it embraces all of the nature conservation resource. LAs as landowners themselves can directly influence the wildlife value of areas under their control and management. The ability to designate Local Nature Reserves on land important for nature conservation is increasingly being used and over two hundred Country Parks have been established throughout Britain. Although the latter are primarily intended for informal recreation on the urban fringe, they often contain areas of significant wildlife interest e.g. the SSSI within Black Park, Slough. Open spaces, school grounds, roadside verges, smallholdings and other LA land all have actual or potential wildlife value. The employment of specialist staff by LAs to advise upon and implement nature conservation programmes, both on LA managed sites and on private land, has increased in recent years. This has resulted in more conservation work being undertaken as well as improved liaison with bodies such as English Nature and the County Wildlife Trusts. The help of individual naturalists with recording and advice about site management is invaluable; there is always the need to extend such help, particularly for invertebrates. Most LAs have grant schemes which can be used to fund nature conservation initiatives though their scope and budget are variable. Pond

restoration/creation, tree planting and hedging are typical projects but money may be available for purchase of equipment or survey expenses in some cases. In addition to grant-aiding 'one-off projects on private land, LAs also have the power to negotiate management agreements with other landowners though in practice this is seldom done. Other initiatives open to U s include the preparation of nature conservation strategies - currently being undertaken by Bucks County Council - and the establishment of databases on wildlife and habitats. Both initiatives can assist in the development and implementation of policies, thereby integrating conservation into authorities' forward planning. All U s should be undertaking at least some of the measures outlined above though the extent to which they do so is variable.

-

However, all LAs are involved in the regulation of land use, agriculture and forestry excepted, through the operation of the planning system. The production of development plans outlining areas for new housing, waste disposal, mineral extraction etc. is fundamental to the planning process and can lead to both protection and destruction of wildlife sites. You will be aware of the many designations - SSSI, LNR, AONB etc. - which sites or areas may be given in order to highlight their nature conservation andtor landscape value. This 'flagging' of key sites enables planners to take their importance into account when producing development plans and considering planning applications which may affect such areas. How can conservation organisations and individual naturalists contribute to the planning process to ensure effective protection of valuable sites? Firstly, comment can be made on development plans and objections lodged or amendments suggested as appropriate. Secondly, objections can be made to planning applications which may have a detrimental effect on nature conservation sites. There is a statutory requirement for English Nature to be consulted where proposed development may affect a SSSI. In some counties, including Bucks, another tier of non-statutory sites below SSSI level is often recognised as having significant value and, as such, is also considered within the planning process.

L

The Biological and Geological Notification Map sites (BNMs), of which there are about two thousand in Bucks, have been evaluated using accepted biological and geological criteria. The register of BNMs is maintained by Julian Scott, Environmental Records Officer at the County Museum. Where a planning proposal falls within 500 metres of a BNM then the planning authority should inform Julian who will then assess the likely effects and submit a report, having consulted relevant organisations (e.g. BBONT) or individuals as appropriate. Biological data is often limited for BNM sites in terms of the groups covered - chiefly vascular plants - so there is always scope for additional recording, particularly monitoring in order to keep records up to date. There is an increasing need to have quick access to reliable, up-to-date biological data in order to respond to planning applications. Frequently applications arrive during the quieter months when site evaluation is limited if there is no existing data. Having an Environmental Records Centre to act as a clearing house for records, and ultimately computerising them for easy retrieval, is a real bonus for Bucks. However, the system is very much dependant upon recorders submitting information - I know of several rare breeding bird sites which have been lost in Southern England due to suppression of records.

To conclude, LAs promote nature conservation in a variety of ways including sympathetic management of land under their control, employment of specialist staff and by giving advice and grant aid to other organisations and individuals. The planning system increasingly takes account of the potential environmental effects of development e.g. Environmental Impact Assessment legislation requiring Environmental Statements to be submitted with applications for major development. Nature conservation can be used as an argument for either modifying or refusing applications, but only if backed up by comprehensive biological/geological data which has been objectively evaluated. The provision of such data by individual naturalists or conservation organisations is therefore vital in helping to protect valuable sites and, in some cases, contribute to their effective management. Jeremy Halls, Assistant Ecologist, Bucks County Council.

A LOOK AT THE BUTTERFLY COLLECTIONS IN BUCKINGHAMSHIRE COUNTY MUSEUM

I think it would be safe to say that most museums with any natural history collections have some Lepidoptera in their care. Collecting butterflies and moths has been a popular amateur and scientific pursuit at least since Victorian times and collections have come to museums upon the death of their owners, cessation of interest in the hobby or for similar reasons. Buckinghamshire County Museum is not exactly overwhelmed with Lepidoptera but it does house several "usefulN collections. While we were aware that there were old specimens, probably of historical interest, and certainly a range of British rarities, no one on the staff has had time to research these collections properly, a situation which sadly applies to many natural history specimens in museums today. We were able to remedy this recently however, when the local entomologist and butterfly expert Dr Michael Salmon gave up some of his time to look through the Museum's butterfly specimens. Apart from pointing out aberrations and varieties, he found a number of specimens of considerable historical and probably scientific interest. In the absence of a published catalogue, whichmay yet materialize if our current programme of computerizing the Museum's specimen records goes according to plan, I will attempt to give here an outline of Michael Salmon's findings. There are three main reference collections of Lepidoptera; those of R.V.Aldridge, G.H.B.Oliver, and Sir Eric Ansorge (who wrote "The Macrolepidoptera of Buckinghamshire", 1 9 6 9 ) . All contain a respectable number of specimens collected in Bucks, which is why the Museum acquired them, but there are also specimens from elsewhere in Britain and some from the continent. Local specialities represented include Black Hairstreak ( S a t r y i u m p r u n i ) ; the Ansorge collection contains individuals from Grendon Underwood taken in 1948. Aldridge collected local Duke of Burgundy Fritillaries ( H a m e a r i s l u c i n a ) , and a good specimen of the Brown Argus, A r i c i a a g e s t i s var. r a d i a t a is in the Oliver collection, dated 1 9 2 2 and from Bucks. When it comes to rare and extinct species all three collections have their excitements. There are British specimens of the Large Blue ( M a c u l i n e a a r i o n ) and Large Copper ( L y c a e n a d i s p a r ) . One specimen of the latter is dated 1832 from Whittlesea and there can be little doubt that it is genuine. Another is labelled as coming from Howard Vaughan's sale of 1890 and thus from one of the great Victorian collections. Black-veined Whites ( A p o r i a c r a t a e g i ) are

represented in two of the collections, though there isn't the evidence in the labels that any of these originated from British stock; some are labelled as being bred at High Wycombe in 1949 and the species is thought to have died out in this country in the 1920's. There are some splendid Mazarine Blues (Cyaniris semiargus, another species long extinct in Britain) which are interesting; one labelled as coming from Westmorland in 1899 which may or may not be a genuine-British record and two specimens in the Ansorge collection which were purchased in "Stevens Sale". One of these was taken by Frederick Bond who Michael Salmon recognises as a respectable collector. Chequered Skipper (Carterocephalus palaemon) is represented in the Ansorge collection by a specimen from Northamptonshire. It is a pity that there is no date with this o n e ~ a sit would be nice to know for sure if it was taken before declared extinct in England in about 1955.

b

Butterflies which are currently rare, breeding in Britain or seen here as migrants, are well represented in the collections. Species include High Brown Fritillary (Argynnis adippe), Queen of Spain Fritillary (A.lathonia), Heath Fritillary (Mellicta athalia), Pale Clouded Yellow (Colias hyale), Berger's Clouded Yellow (C.alfracariensis) , Silver-spotted Skipper (Hesperia comma). Swallowtail (Papilio machaon) , Purple Emperor (Apatura iris) and Adonis Blue (Lysandra bellargus). Some have long histories, dating back to the nineteenth century and they are still, to the credit of their successive owners, in good condition. There are, for instance, Queen of Spain Fritillaries taken from south east England in 1883 and 1882, with their original collector's names on the labels (Fenn and Gray jnr. respectively). East Anglian specimens of Swallowtail date from 1901 and 1896, the latter "bred at Wicken Fenn. A Camberwell Beauty (Nymphalis antiopa) has no less than three carefully written labels describing its history. It was originally captured at "Shirley Commonn in 1872 ( " the great antiopa yearn, see Emmet, A.M. & Heath, J., 1989, The Moths and Butterflies of Great Bri tain and Ireland The Butterflies, pub1 Harley Books) by Louis Larmiersop. A second label records its sale; "Briggs coil, Stanway Paris Sale 12.v.21n and the third says; "ex. Sir M.McLeod Coll. Sale 18.x.1950 Debenham & Storrs Lot 48."

.

-

One or two specimens gave even Michael Salmon pause for thought and needed further examination before their identity could be confirmed. A rather drab blue butterfly in the Oliver collection was identified by Michael Salmon as a Short-tailed Blue, (Everes argiades), he describes it as "...one of the country's rarest butterflies. The specimen is larger than usual and rather more grey-blue, but the underside is quite typical.". Unfortunately, there is no data with this female specimen, so its provenance is uncertain. The number of varieties and aberrations identified by Michael Salmon was an eye-opener to me, even though I knew of the predilection of butterfly collectors for such things. I will not go into detail here, but it is interesting to note that in the Oliver collection alone there are at least six varieties of Chalk-hill Blue (Lysandra coridon). The Clouded Yellow (Colias croceus) seems to be quite variable too, f. helice, f. helice ab. purpurascens and ab. striata being amongst the specimens. There are intriguing mutations and pathological specimens; dwarf Clouded Yellows and Holly Blues (Celastrina argiolus), an albino Small White (Pieris rapae), Chalk-hill Blues with wings not fully developed, a Small Skipper (Thymelicus sylvestris) with a scale defect which makes the specimen seem paler coloured in patches. While most people would agree that we now have enough specimens of butterflies preserved in museums and private collections for reference it is surely worth acknowledging the part that such collections have played in enhancing our understanding of the variability and distribution patterns of butterflies in

this country. Long series of, for instance, Purple Emperors displayed in an entomologist's drawer may seem pointless to the uninitiated, but there may have been a proper scientific purpose in gathering comparative material. The collector probably bred most of the specimens anyway and did not therefore take adults dir@ctly from the wild. Nor is it proven that butterfly collecting was ever a cause of a species' extinction in Britain, climate changes and habitat destruction being far more the likely causes. Many lepidopterists nowadays take photographs rather than specimens and gather distribution data for conservation organisations such as the British Butterfly Conservation Society. Museums can do their bit by encouraging research on their collections, especially if they have staff or helpful experts such as Michael Salmon to do the work. If any members of the Bucks Invertebrate Recording Group would like to view the Museum collections (it needn't just be the butterflies) you would be very welcome to do so. However we do need to arrange an appointment beforehand, and please, could you wait until I have returned from maternity leave in May lest the stampede give Julian a nervous breakdown. Kate Hawkins

REPORT ON ROTIFERA & ENTOMOSTRACA OF HAMPTON POND OPPOSITE WENDOVER PARISH CHURCH The Rotifera found on November 24th. 1992 were as follows: P o l y a r t h r a m a j o r Burckhardt 1900; a planktonic species not common in the Aylesbury area. S y n c h a e t a p e c t i n a t a Ehrb. 1832; a planktonic species common in this kind of habitat. K e r a t e l l a q u a d r a t a (Muller 1786); a planktonic species common in this kind of habitat. Carrying parthenogenetic eggs. K . c o c h l e a r i s (Gosse 1851); a planktonic species common in this kind of habitat. Carrying parthenogenetic eggs. C e p h a l o d e l l a a u r i c u l a t a (Mtiller 1773) ; commonly met with in the large open waters of ponds. C e p h a l o d e l l a c a t e l l i n a (MUller 1786); small weedy ponds, bowls of rainwater, weedy margins of large ponds etc. Worldwide distribution and also in the Wendover Canal.

Enormous numbers of Entomostraca were found also found at all the half dozen or so sites round the margin of Hampton Pond from which Arthur Barren and I made net collections shortly before mid-day. Most of the Entomostraca belonged to the Cladocera, often referred to as "Waterfleasn. Possibly in about equal numbers were Daphnia l o n g i s p i n a (Muller) and Daphnia p u l e x (De Geer). Bosmina l o n g i r o s t r i s (MUller) was possibly equally as numerous as the two species of Daphnia, but by the time we were able to examine the samples a few hours later most of the Bosmina were caught up in

the surface film. In smaller quantities than the Daphnia was Simocephalus vetulus (MUller) but even so this was very numerous. It was noticeable that the Simocephalus tended to be concentrated along the South Western margin of the pond. This is a genus that tends to be more at home amongst weeds and shorelines and is not quite so adapted to the open water as the two species of Daphnia present. Although both species of Daphnia were carrying parthenogenetic eggs and developing young (which are liberated in an active state from the brood pouch), both species were also beginning to produce fertilised 'resting eggs' enclosed-in the protective ephippial cases. These saddle-like ephippia become detached from the carapace when the animal dies, and can remain floating in vast quantities, hatching in the Spring. Numerous males were found of both Daphnia species. Males are easily-recognised. Apart from being smaller in size, they have larger eyes by comparison with the female, longer first antennules, and each of the first internal (abdominal) limbs are furnished with long stout hooks. Large quantities of floating ephippia from the Daphnia were found along the S.W. shore. Daphnia longispina may be readily identified and separated from the pulex group (which includes D. obtusa Kurz , D.magna Straus and D. curvirostris Eylmann) by its lack of comb or combs on the claw of the post-abdomen. These claw combs are present in all members of the pulex group.

The water of the pond was crystal clear with many floating desmids of the genus Closterium. No submerged macrophytes were observed. Copepoda were scarce. Cyclopoida were represented by Cyclops sp. and the Calanoida by Diaptomus gracilis Sars. Nauplii of both were more numerous than adults in both cases. More recently, on February 10th 1993, a further visit was made and net samples revealed a Daphnia population comparable with that found in November; D.pulex and D.longispina found on the first visit being the two species present. Wheras both seemed to be present in approximately equal numbers in November, D. pulex greatly outnumbered D. longispina in February. In November both had been reproducing both sexually and asexuallywheras in February bothwere only exhibiting asexual (parthenogenetic) reproduction. Further comment on the pattern of both methods of reproduction will be made in a future Newsletter. Another cladoceran, Simocephalus vetulus, present last November was still present in the February samples but in reduced numbers; another, Bosmina longirostris, present in enormous numbers in the November collections were extremely scarce on February 10th. The calanoid copepod Diaptomus gracili s was found in reduced numbers, and small numbers of Cyclops sp. and nauplii were present. Of the Rotifera only Synchaeta pectinata was found, but this species was somewhat more numerous than in the earlier samples. Eric Hollowday

AN UNUSUAL LOCALITY FOR HELIX POMATIA In August we received a telephone call at the Museum from a man in Buckingham who said that he had Roman Snails in his garden. We were sceptical about this at first, as Helix pomatia had only been recorded on the Chalk in

Buckinghamshire, and is sometimes confused with large specimens of Helix aspersa, the Garden Snail. The caller clearly suspected we didn't believe him because a few weeks later we received several empty shells, unmistakeably of Roman Snails. He described a healthy population of the species living at the expense of his - garden plants, though he was unwilling to blitz them with pesticide if they were truly an unusual find. (How nice it is to hear words of toleration for our less glamorous invertebrates!). Helix pomatia is very much a southern England species, living mainly on grassland on chalk on the North Downs, in the Chilterns and on limestone in the Cotswolds. The garden locality in Buckingham appears to lie on the boundary of the Great Oolite Group of limestones and the Cornbrash limestones. The calcareous nature of these bedrocks thus appears to favour the snail. It is still worth noting though that gardens are not generally a favoured habitat. Adult Roman Snails measure up to 50mm across the shell, making them the largest snails in north west Europe. Apart from size, they are distinguished from Garden Snails by the presence of a very small umbilicus (the 'hole' on the underside of the shell at the base of the whorls); Helix aspersa's umbilicus is completely sealed by the thickened lip around the 'mouth' of the shell. Helix pomatia also tends to be a paler colour than H.aspersa. Despite the common name the Romans are not thought to be responsible for introducing the species to Britain as H.pomatia shells have been found in preRoman deposits. However the picture is somewhat confused as there have been introductions to new sites, though often without much long term success. The Romans seemed to relish them, keeping them in a "Cochlearian,a sort of snail nursery (A.E.Ellis, British Snails, 1926). Today as "escargotsn they are widely eaten on the continent. Buckinghamshire certainly isn't that well off for Roman Snails. The only recently recorded localities apart from the one in Buckingham are Grangelands/Pulpit Hill and Aston Clinton Ragpits. This is rated a Notable Nb Species in the Invertebrate Sites Register so it may pay to check sightings of large Helix species in the less likely places in future. Kate Hawkins

UNCOMMON HOVERFLY IN BUCKS

During August 1992 our garden pond in Prestwood was frequently visited by a striking but unfamiliar hoverfly. In general shape and size it was much like the common Vol ucella bombylans, a bumble bee mimic, but lacking the long hair of that species. The abdomen was conspicuously marked with broad bright yellow bands, while its thorax was very dark. It proved to be Volucella inanis (L.), a distinct and easily identifiable fly, only confusable with the rare V.zonaria, which is noticeably larger and more brown, not so bright, in colour. Both are common on the continent, but have become established - since the 1940s in the case of V.zonaria - in Britain only close to London. The larvae of both species inhabit wasps' nests, where they scavenge dead pupae. V-inanis is particularly associated with the hornet (Vespa crabro) and is similarly distributed. It is recorded from the outer suburbs of London and the adjacent countryside, with a few records for Kent, Cornwall and Oxfordshire. In addition to the hornet, it has been found with the common wasp Vespula germanica, and a nest of that species was only a few yards from the pond that

V.inanis was frequenting.

Tony & Val Marshal1

DATES FOR THE DIARY 1993 Saturday 12th June 10.00 am till late. Roughly middle of the County meeting. Leaders Kate Hawkins and/or Julian Scott (0296-696012; Julian 0793-495224 @ weekends).. All day meeting based around the Museum's premises at Halton. In close proximity to Wendover Woods (moth-ing and other collecting permissions will be arranged) and other Chiltern sites. Rudimentary lab and microscope facilities available. Any specific"requests,please contact Julian.

-

Saturday 27th June 10.00 am till late. North of the County meeting. The leader is John Wickham (0908-372966) and the focal point will be the ARC Wildfowl Centre, Great Linford Pits, Milton Keynes . The Wildfowl Centre is in the north of Milton Keynes at SP843428 with the site entrance between the tall poplars on the north side of the Newport Pagnall to Wolverton Road at SP850425 (near the Black Horse pH). On entering the site turn almost immediately left over the cattle grid (ignore the notice banning cars) and follow the road around to the Centre and car park - be warned there are two ramps on the way1 The Centre offers laboratory facilities with a microscope but you are welcome to bring your own. The site is part of a series of wet pits no longer used for gravel extraction which has been managed for 20 years by the Game Conservancy who conduct research into the management of such sites as wildfowl breeding reserves. The Milton Keynes Natural History Society will also be holding a field meeting here on this day which will include a barbeque -bring your own food - later in the day prior to a moth trapping session with George and Frances Higgs. Saturday 31st July - Bernwood Forest, including Waterperry Wood organised by the British Entomological and Natural History Society jointly with Butterfly Conservation and the Amateur Entomologist's Society. Paul Waring has kindly supplied details of this meeting, the main aims of which are:

.-

a) to record as many moth species as possible on the day, to accumulate records from the 1990s, for comparison with, and as a supplement to, the historical list compiled in 1988. b) to record as wide a range of other invertebrates as members can find and identify . The day-time meeting will commence at 1l.OOhrs at the Oakley Wood carpark (SP611117) and will involve walking round the rides and between the trees, using a range of non-destructive means to sample the invertebrates, including netting, sweeping and beating. Some material will need to be removed for identification purposes, although not butterflies or the majority of moths. This part of the meeting will be over by 16.00hrs, or earlier if the weather is bad. The night-time meeting for moths will commence at 20.OOhrs (again, rendezvous

at the Oakley Wood carpark), and on past experience is likely to be the most popular part. This will involve operation of light-traps and painting some small patches of black treacle on the trunks of a few trees. The aim will be to get traps dispersed throughout the wood and to record from as many compartments as'possible. The meeting will continue until 0l.OOhrs or longer if new species are still continuing to arrive at this time. Free copies of the annotated historical list of all macro-moths recorded in the wood will be available on the day, which will also serve as a rough guide to the likely moths in the surrounding area. The meeting will be written up in the British Journal of Entomology and Natural History. Saturday 4th September - All day meeting with the British Arachnological Society at Burnham Beeches led by Helen Read (0753-647358). Meet at the Corporation of London's Burnham Beeches Office at SU945845. The Office is on Hawthorn Lane just west of the end of Lord Mayors Drive, opposite some newish houses behind a brick wall. Uhen coming from Famham Common proceed down Lord Mayors Drive right to the end. Turn right and it is the second drive on the right about 50 metres. Plenty of parking. Saturday 23rd October 1993 - At the Museum's Halton premises at 2.00pm. Finally an indoor meeting where the date has not been re-arranged!