Category: Science
Will we have fruit in a future without bees?
A photo has been circulating this week that suggests that this is what our grocery stores will look like without bees:

Whole Foods Market produce department without items dependent on pollinator populations. (PRNewsFoto/Whole Foods Market)
Is that true? Is this our life without bees, come the future Beepocalypse?
A fruit is, essentially, a delicious plant ovary with embryos (seeds) inside. It’s how plants reproduce. Bees and other pollinators serve as plant sexual surrogates by spreading pollen (plant sperm!) around to flower ovaries. A fruit tree flower has to be pollinated to “set fruit” or begin to create the plant embryos that will become apples.
Some fruits are self-pollinating, and can fertilize themselves without any bees involved. The Navel Oranges seen in the photo above are a good example of a fruit that can self-pollinate. Most fruit trees–pears and apples in particular–are self-sterile for their own pollen. If you plant all Royal Delicious apples, for example, you won’t get fruit, with or without bees. Just as we don’t often marry our cousins, apple and pear trees require cross-pollination with “pollinizer varieties” that are not closely related to produce a full crop of fruit.
So it’s certainly true that loss of bees and other pollinating insects would limit our fruit choices. But what would happen if bees went away all together?
Actually, we already know what raising fruit without honey bees looks like. In a remote area in China, humans pollinate 100% of fruit trees by hand. Armed with pollen-loaded paintbrushes and cigarette filters, people swarm around pear and apple trees in spring, replacing bees as pollinators. The reason why they do that, though, is more complex than just “the bees died.”
There’s a fair amount of data about the history of human pollination, and the reason it happens in China has as much to do with economics and apple biology as it does with missing bees. In the early 1990s, farmers of marginal lands in the Hindu Kush Himalayan region–an area spanning parts of Nepal, China, Pakistan, and India–realized that apples could be a major cash crop. Their land was mountainous and hard to farm, so tree fruits were ideally suited to the region. A major shift occurred from subsistence farming to fruit crops. The payoffs were large–in some areas, farmers quadrupled their income. Now they had cash on hand to send kids to school and build roads. Quality of life improved.
With that early success, farmers found that certain varieties of apples and pears sold better than others. As new orchards went in, more and more of the same cultivars of apples were planted. And that is when things started to go wrong.
Clearing marginal forested lands for more agriculture destroyed nesting and food resources native pollinator species needed. The problem with insects as commercial pollinators is that they can’t just appear for 2 weeks, pollinate your plants, and disappear. They have to have something to eat the rest of the year, and a place to live. Clearing mountain forests got rid of habitat that pollinators needed.
Farmers planting new trees in their orchards made a logical economic choice: plant more trees that make marketable fruit. The consequences of that choice, though, were that fruit set was poor. Most of the trees they planted were the same variety, so were self-sterile.
So farmers added a few of what are called “pollinizer” trees–trees that serve as pollen donors. Pollinizer varieties usually don’t have pretty fruit, which means that farmers are giving up potential income if they plant them. The recommended mix of fruiting trees and pollinizer trees in orchards is 70:30. In most fruit orchards in this region, less than 10% of the trees were pollinizer varieties. Worse, you can’t just randomly pick two different kinds of apple or pear trees and have them be cross-fertile. (This compatibility matrix gives you a sense of just how complex choosing two pear cultivars to grow can be.) Your pollinizer variety also must bloom at the same time as your fruit variety–pollen needs to be used while it is fresh, and can’t be stored. So even with plenty of bees, fruit production was very low, and in some areas crops failed completely.
Another perfectly sensible economic decision made by farmers was to spray pesticides often to have better looking fruit, which commanded a better price. A perception that the problem with poor fruit production was caused by pest insects also encouraged more spraying. Just as in cultivar selection, this had unforeseen biological consequences. Poor pollination due to pollen incompatibility was made worse by killing off pollinating insects.
In 1999, the problem of poor fruit set was widespread throughout the Hindu Kush regions of Nepal, China, Pakistan, and India. Hand pollination was widely practiced through this region. However, by 2011, only apple growers in the Maoxian region of China were still hand pollinating. What was different about China that made hand pollination persist?
In Nepal, India, and Pakistan, the government and NGOs provided support to help promote using native pollinator species, as well as provided training and education about managing pollination. Planting of native host trees that provided nectar to support colonies through the harvest year was encouraged. Bees are now an important part of local economies, and hand pollination is now rare.
In China, officials promoted and offered training in hand pollination, rather than offering information about native pollinators. That’s not the only reason hand pollination persisted, though–100% of apple crops in the Maoxian region are pollinated by hand because it makes economic sense. By using humans as pollinators, the number of pollenizer trees that have to be planted can be minimized, and valuable land isn’t used up for non-productive trees. Fruit set is also much higher with human pollinators–every flower is fully pollinated and can become fruit. A person can pollinate 5–10 trees a day, depending on the size of the trees. Farmers pay their human pollinators US $12–19/person/day. The cost of renting a bee colony for pollination in 2010 was US $46.88/day.
Why are bees so expensive in Maoxian? Honey bees are still present–up to 50% of the fruit farmers surveyed in the Maoxian region in 2011 also kept honey bees! Bees are still viewed as primarily a honey-producing species in this region, so the connection between bees and pollination is not strong. Farmers in this region of China are uninformed about the effects of pesticides on bees–half of apple farmers surveyed did not know that pesticides would kill bees. The Maoxian region also sprays pesticides more often than other regions where pollinators have recovered. Most Maoxian beekeepers will not rent their hives to orchards, since the pesticide sprays continue during bloom season and they risk losing their entire hive.

One last additional factor is making things difficult for farmers: Global Climate Change. Frequent rains, low temperatures, and cloudy weather affect the number of days that plants flower and the times that pollinators can fly. Changes in flowering time also means that fruit trees and their local pollinators may not be in sync, which makes a mismatch between pollinator and plant timing more likely in an already strained system. Humans are more effective pollinators than insects under these adverse conditions.
What can North Americans learn from China’s pollination failure?

The story of hand pollination in China illustrates what a failure to understand natural ecosystem services looks like. Ecosystem services are things the earth does for us for free: Oxygen is produced; water is filtered; and plants are pollinated. When parts of an ecosystem are removed, it stops functioning the way it has in the past.
Problems with bees, agriculture, and pollination are deeply related to issues of habitat loss, global warming, and basic plant biology. Pesticides are a problem in bee deaths–for all bees, not just honey bees. But just getting rid of all pesticides will not solve our bee problems, and pesticides are only part of the story of human pollination.
In the most recent US honey bee reports from the winter of 2012-2013, 31% of hives failed in the United States. It wasn’t Colony Collapse Disorder or poisoning that was the problem, though–most of the bees starved. A summer of drought that reduced honey storage combined with odd winter weather stresses bee hives. It doesn’t help that corn, soybeans, and golf courses are not nutritious food sources for honey bees. We also know that incredible losses in native bee diversity are happening–in one study, 50% of Midwestern native bee species disappeared over a 100 year period.
Is China’s experience a picture of our future without bees? Probably not. But preserving our pollinators and pollinator habitat will be critical to keeping our food choices diverse. This Pollinator Week, consider planting some food for bees, or setting aside some nesting space for native bees. Check out this huge resource center for North American plant lists, nesting guides, and more.
It’s National Pollinator Week!

Once again, It’s time to celebrate the little animals that… facilitate plant sex by moving plant sperm around.
I’ve discovered over time that a lot of people don’t actually know what pollination is, other than it’s something that’s needed to get fruit. That’s certainly true; apples, bananas, blueberries, melons, peaches, pumpkins, almonds, and a whole bunch of other plants need to be pollinated for us to get the food we like.
That’s the what of pollination. But the WHY seems to be left out. Plants need lovin’ too, and the options for them to get their freak on are somewhat limited. It’s tough to “throw a leg over” when you don’t actually have any legs.
Pollination = sex for plants.
There. I’ve said it.
Sure, you can toss your pollen out on the wind and hope it lands in the right place. And for a lot of plants, evergreens in particular, this works just fine. Most spring days my car looks like there was a pine tree bukakke fest.
That methodology results in a lot of wasted gametes (plant sperm) though, so for nearly all flowering plants, insects or other pollinators are needed for plant nookie. Think of bees and other pollinators as little flying plant wangs.
Most flowers contain both male and female sexual parts, and while plants can self-pollinate, it’s a lot more enjoyable productive to have a second (or third…or fourth…) party involved. Cross-pollination also reduces inbreeding.
Plants attract insect pollinators with lovely colorful displays, special smells, and gifts of nectar or extra pollen that makes a nice snack. And in return plants receive a sort of sexual courier service. This partnership has been going on for over 100 million years, and has resulted in amazing modifications in both plants and animals.
Without pollinators, some of the finest things in life would not exist:
Chocolate.
Coffee.
Tequila.
All brought to you by a bug-facilitated bonk.
The Xerces Society has many free and wonderful publications on how to plant habitat for pollinators. Why not check those out and establish a horizontal hula zone in your backyard? And don’t forget to give your sweetheart a bouquet of plant genitalia.
(yes, this is a repost of last year’s Pollinator Week essay, mostly because I didn’t have time to look up new euphemisms.)
Outreach in Unusual Places
I was lucky enough to be part of a series of sessions at ScienceOnline this January that discussed Science Outreach. It should tell you a little about how hectic my life has been lately that I’m just now writing up something that happened in January! Finally I found time to sit down and put together a brief summary of what we talked about in our session.
From the SciOnline13 session description:
The perennial discussion about scientists ‘doing’ outreach intensified this year, with lots of opinion and some data about who’s doing it, who’s fault it is that so few do it, what the roadblocks are, and how to alleviate them. Rather than host yet another tiresome round of the blame game (e.g. Scientists should do more outreach! Scientists suck at outreach!), the goal of this track is to create a…resource for scientists hoping to do more and/or better outreach, or trying to drum up enthusiasm for outreach in their departments/institutions and for those hoping to recruit more scientists to do outreach.”
Emily and I moderated a session called “Outreach in Unusual Places” to focus on ways scientists can find new audiences. When many scientists talk about outreach, they mean a small subset of activities — blogging and formal education, for example. That has a pretty standard audience–people who are already interested in science, and that have the economic ability to connect online; students already enrolled in an educational program; folks with leisure time to consume a course in a topic they are already interested in.

What about the rest of the population?
Our session focused on how to go beyond traditional venues for science outreach. One of the themes that I’ve written about over and over here at the Bug Blog is how we need to re-think our model of science education. A lot of science communication operates within a Push Model.
Experts produce information from their science, but it’s not easily accessible by the general public (and frankly, sometimes not by other scientists, it’s so dense). Occasionally research is communicated as a press release and picked up as news, but for the most part scientists are just talking to themselves. And that works fine for our existing audiences, that are already committed to learning about science.
But how do we GROW that audience?
I think we need to change our outreach model to more of a two way-transfer of information. I create content here to draw an audience in and start a conversation; the audience will provide feedback. My readers may say “that didn’t make sense” or “that’s cool, but that’s not what I’m interested in. Here’s what I really need to know.”
It’s a conversation, not a lecture.
It isn’t just public outreach; it’s public engagement. It’s not enough to write interesting stuff and toss it onto the internet waters. You have to actually engage people in conversations. You have to start talking with them, not at them.
An example of the Pull Model in action
One of the hardest parts of being a science communicator is finding an audience. Cities can fill a stadium for a sports event; not so much for a scientist. Basically, by partnering with groups that have already done the hard work of bringing people together, scientists can have a bigger impact.
Science Fiction Conventions are some of the largest and longest running meetings around. South by Southwest and Netroots Nations are some of the largest social media gatherings in the US. In our session, we talked about how scientists and science educators can work with some of those audiences to broaden the scope of our outreach efforts. All of these groups have to put together an engaging program for their attendees. Scientists have interesting things to say and show. It’s a win-win!
DragonCon has a regular science track that Emily participates in yearly, and also hosts vaccine outreach efforts. DragonCon annual attendance is over 50,000 people. I’ll be participating for my 4th year at ConVergence, a large midwest science fiction convention that usually has around 5,000 attendees. I usually am on an “Ask a Scientist Anything” panel. We offer panels on evolution, climate change, and other hot science topics. For some panels we have up to 100 people in the audience, all engaged and asking questions.
Having a real live scientist answer your questions makes a difference. Having a real live scientist talk about spiders, or genetically modified organisms, or rumors of genetically modified spiders*, makes them slightly less scary. It’s harder to see science as evil incarnate when it’s represented in person by a small, round, middle-aged woman with glasses.
If you happen to be a small round woman in a fluffy green insect suit, that makes science much less threatening, and conversations much easier to start. Here I am on a bus in my insect costume. Just walking around dressed like this starts conversations.
I had great discussions with hotel maids, bus drivers, taxi drivers, Starbucks baristas, and a whole bunch of people at a real estate convention happening concurrently with the ScienceOnline conference.
It is personal connections that make change. Those personal connections can be virtual or IRL, but they have to happen for a conversation to occur.
It can be difficult to convince a department chair that you need to travel to what is, basically, a giant nerd party. With booze and costumes. I have personally paid my way to all these events, rather than try to explain them to my boss. But it is absolutely the highlight of my year, and is invaluable at letting me see into the minds of people that are not bug specialists, or biologists. It’s really easy for me as a specialist to forget that I know a lot of stuff that other people don’t. And, also, that a lot of the stuff that I know is completely irrelevant to the rest of the population.
It isn’t something that you can easily assess, although you can indirectly get some measurements of impact with head counts, or how much literature you hand out.
Take your Science To The People (Examples)
- Sidewalk Science: A Different Approach To Outreach by Jason G. Goldman
- Push vs. Pull Strategy for Science Outreach
- Understanding push-pull market forces and promoting science to under-served audiences
- Why Zoos and Aquariums Matter: Handbook of Research Findings
- Wonderfully creative Vancouver Science Museum ad campaign
- Live-streaming Climate research to an airport
- This is not the petition you are looking for: The White House brings the Nerdy
- ReefTeach: instead of making visitors travel to a remote education center, this group rents snorkels on the beach…and delivers a spiel about not walking on corals.

Research! There is a huge body of research about informal science. Some examples:
- Database of informal science research
- List of National Academy Commissioned papers on Science Outreach and Learning
- Surrounded by Science: Learning Science in Informal Environments. Marilyn Fenichel, Heidi A. Schweingruber, National Academies Press. 2010.
- Why Zoos and Aquariums Matter: A handbook of research key findings and results from National Audience Survey. 2010. J. Fraser and J. Stickler.
- Bowler M.T., Buchanan-Smith H.M., Whiten A. & Chaline N. (2012). Assessing Public Engagement with Science in a University Primate Research Centre in a National Zoo, PLoS ONE, 7 (4) e34505. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034505.s001
- Holmes J.A. (2011). Informal learning: Student achievement and motivation in science through museum-based learning, Learning Environments Research, 14 (3) 263-277. DOI: 10.1007/s10984-011-9094-y
- Fisher M.L., Kruger D.J. & Garcia J.R. (2011). Understanding and Enhancing the Role of the Mass Media in Evolutionary Psychology Education, Evolution: Education and Outreach, 4 (1) 75-82. DOI: 10.1007/s12052-010-0302-5
- Artz K. & Wormer H. (2011). What recipients ask for: An analysis of ‘user question generated’ science coverage, Journalism, 12 (7) 871-888. DOI: 10.1177/1464884911412826
- Pergams O.R.W. & Zaradic P.A. (2008). Evidence for a fundamental and pervasive shift away from nature-based recreation, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105 (7) 2295-2300. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0709893105
- Khalil K. & Ardoin N. (2011). Programmatic Evaluation in Association of Zoos and Aquariums–Accredited Zoos and Aquariums: A Literature Review, Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 10 (3) 168-177. DOI: 10.1080/1533015X.2011.614813
- NSF Handbook for informal outreach evaluation
Things to read from other SciOnline sessions:
- What is outreach, and what do you need to do it?
- List of obstacles for practicing scientists to do outreach
What examples of unusual outreach can YOU add to the list?
*Because I know someone will ask, no there are no genetically modified spiders AFAIK. Although some spider genes have gone into other animals.
The Mad Hatterpillar
There is nothing I love more than finding an amazing new insect to tell you about! Today it’s the “Mad Hatterpillar.” As you can see from this photo, these caterpillars (Uraba lugens, larvae of a Gum Leaf Skeletoniser moth) have a strange attachment to their heads. It’s a stack of their shed head capsules! These caterpillars are native to Australia and eat eucalyptus trees.
Where do they get all these extra heads, anyway?
Moths and butterflies are just flying gonads that make new caterpillars. Caterpillars are feeding machines with one primary purpose: eating enough food to build the body of a future moth or butterfly. A caterpillar stuffs itself with food, but eventually is limited by its exoskeleton, which is rigid and can’t grow. ‘Pillars deal with this by splitting their external skin, shedding it, and making a new, bigger exoskeleton so they have room to grow. For some reason, this species of moth caterpillars keeps their heads and build themselves a strange “hat” that gets taller as they grow.
Why do they build themselves a hat? Are they headed to Ascot? A royal wedding? No one really seems to know WHY the caterpillars keep their old heads hanging around. From a 1980 paper describing the biology of the caterpillars:
“It is hard to imagine what, if any, purpose the retention of a stack of head capsules might serve. Perhaps it might attract the first one or two investigative pecks from a bird or lizard; the predator would initially obtain only a mouthful of dry exuviae [BG note: exuviae =shed skins]. However, the dense, hairy coat alone would probably serve as an adequate repellent for most birds. If a bird really desired to consume one of these larvae, it is unlikely that it would be deterred by a stack of rather easily-dislodged exuviae attached to one end of the morsel.”
If you do happen to see one of these, you should not touch it! Apparently these caterpillars are covered with highly itchy and irritating spines–which seems to make their chapeau of old heads a bit redundant.
Most newer publications about this insect focus on its status as a pest of Eucalyptus, rather than it’s strange headgear. Clearly this is a thesis in search of a graduate student!
By the way, some related Nolid moth caterpillars have balloon heads, which is freaky in an entirely different and wonderful way.
Reference:
McFarland, N. (1980). Retention of cast head capsules by some nolid immatures in four Old World countries. Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera., 17 (4).
Thanks very much to nuytsia_pix for letting me repost these photos!
Silk Pavilion
What would it be like to have 6,500 silkworms spin a house for you?
Mediated Matter Group used a combination of art and mathematics to create a unique structure made by computers and silkworms.
MMG studied silkworms spinning their cocoons and silk on different hexagonal platforms. You can watch some of the videos of those tests; time lapse photography of caterpillars spinning silk at high speed is kind of hypnotic. Inspired by silkworms’ ability to generate a 3-dimensional cocoon out of a single silken thread, the researchers created an algorithm to make a computer think like a silkworm. They then used that model to instruct a robot to weave a structure.
The language they use to describe this really cool project is…well, pretty dry academic speak, actually. Here’s an example:
The primary structure was created of 26 polygonal panels made of silk threads laid down by a CNC (Computer-Numerically Controlled) machine. Overall density variation was informed by the silkworm itself deployed as a biological “printer” in the creation of a secondary structure…. Specifically, we explored the formation of non-woven fiber structures generated by the silkworms as a computational schema for determining shape and material optimization of fiber-based surface structures..”
Skip that. Just watch. I love the idea of caterpillars as 3D printers. Make sure you watch all the way to the credits, because it’s way cool.
Random Factoid:
![]()
In this video and the one I linked earlier, you might notice that the caterpillars themselves appear to be sort of strobing. What you are seeing is their heart beating!
All insects have one long “heart” that runs along their back. These caterpillars are more transparent than the adult insect shown in this diagram, so we can actually see inside. When the video is sped up, the rhythmic contractions of the heart turn into a rapid flicker. You can even see how the contractions pulse up the back of the insect in a wave!
National Moth Week 2013

You all know that I am One. Bad. Moth-er. So I’m here to remind you that once again it’s time for mothing!
July 20th to 28th, 2013
National Moth Week Events in the US
“Citizen scientists around the world will be setting up white sheets and lights in backyards, woods and fields July 20 through July 28 for the second annual National Moth Week, a global science project begun last year to encourage the public to observe and document one of nature’s most diverse creatures…
Through partnerships with major online biological data depositories, National Moth Week
participants can help map moth distribution and provide needed information on other life history aspects around the globe.”
Moth week has many partner organizations that are repositories for data and photos about moths. These include Butterflies and Moths of North America (BAMONA), and BugGuide, among many others. Last year, these partner organizations received more than 3,500 submissions as a result of National Moth Week Moth spottings! You can participate too–just take photos of the moths you see, and upload them to one of the partner organizations with location and other data.
You don’t have to identify your moths–they have experts that will help. The photo you upload with your observations lets a specialist confirm ID. Then that information is used to compile species checklists, and distribution maps. And that data, over time, becomes an invaluable record of species distribution. Science!
What happens at a moth night? It’s a lot of fun! Basically, you put up a sheet and a light with a bunch of your friends, and sit around and wait for moths. So, yes, YOU can do science by sitting around on a beautiful summer night; alcoholic libations may be consumed (although whether or not it is an essential part of mothing varies, depending on who you talk to).
Insect Carl Sagan and science communication
The latest buzz going round the online science community is an article that suggests that scientists might not be doing enough to communicate with the public. Scicurious wrote an excellent reply. I struggled to find an excerpt that I could quote here, because the whole thing had me jumping up and down and shouting “AMEN, SISTER.” Here’s one bit:
“…all this emphasis on these BIG names bothers me more than that. Big names are fine. Everyone wants someone to look up to. But small name researchers make great communicators too. I know I’m not winning any big prizes soon, but I’d like to think I write a witty, educational blog post now and again. Why is fame the most important thing here? Why do we need a big scientific name? Why can’t we make our names, say, through the outreach we do (and some solid, but perhaps lesser known science)?
If no one knows who these big name scientists are anyway (as the article implies), then why is it necessary that they be the ones to do the outreach? After all, many of the science communication success stories the author cites GOT THEIR NAMES through their outreach. Who were the Mythbusters…before Mythbusters? No one outside his field knew who Neil deGrasse Tyson was before he started doing outreach. These people made their names THROUGH their outreach. The emphasis on Big Names that are ALREADY big seems really elitist.”
I’ve said this before, but it’s especially relevant to me now, as I’m in what seems to be the twilight of my career:
I will write this shit even if no one but me reads it.
I love insects, I love to write, and I love to find ways to get people to share my OMGBUGZ moments. I’m busting my ass here and on social media every day, not because I am getting famous, and certainly not because it makes me any money. I do it for love.
We know, from decades of research, that what makes a good teacher is passion. Why were Sagan, or DeGrasse Tyson, Nye, or Attenborough successful? Because they love what they do, they love their science, and it shows. (Also, they started in a completely different media environment. And are dudes. But let’s not go there right now.)
There are people out here online with me, passionately writing, podcasting, or videocasting their hearts out. A few lucky ones make a living at it. But just because I don’t have name recognition, that doesn’t mean that I’m not successful. I measure success one comment and one retweet at a time. I don’t have a klout score as high as John Cusack anymore, but that’s not the point.
One person says they changed their mind about hating spiders.
I said something kind to a graduate student and encouraged her.
A local newspaper corrects a mangled insect factoid.
That?
That is what online science communication success looks like now.
With the advent of the internet, ideas or passions bring people together, rather than physical locations or media channels. Scientists that do outreach online–even when it’s looked down upon by fellow scientists? We are modeling positive deviance. It’s not so much what we write that is important, but THAT WE WRITE AT ALL.
We are creating a model for a new kind of science communication. And we are having a bitchin’ time doing it, which invites new people over to have fun with us. We are modeling different ways to share science online to our friends, our friends’ friends, and to the random strange people who keep searching my blog for “sex with insects.” (You know who you are.)
It’s personal relationships that really change the world. I was inspired by Sagan and Attenborough…but it was my not-famous teachers and mentors that helped me get through school and believe that I could be a scientist too. Small individual creative acts (tweets, blog posts, or just chatting on Facebook) can become a thing of lasting value. Shared and random effort can produce useful and meaningful results.
The beauty of the web is that we don’t all have to have the same motivations or professional level of skill. We don’t all have to be working toward the same goal. We can still make change happen simply by putting our ideas out there. The beauty of the web is that scientists can get online and screw around together, playing with ideas.
Who cares if we’re “doing it right.” We’re doing it.
Which is exactly how Insect Carl Sagan Happened. Enjoy.
This is what started #insectsagan. MT @bug_girl I wear turtlenecks, but sadly have not been anointed as insect Sagan. #billionsofinsects—
Karen James (@kejames) May 28, 2013
Then came this. #insectsagan MT @Alex_Parker @bug_girl Wouldn't turtlenecks block Insect Sagan's spiracles and lead to asphyxiation?—
Karen James (@kejames) May 28, 2013
Then this. #insectsagan MT @bug_girl @Alex_Parker I don't wear pants, so it all works out.—
Karen James (@kejames) May 28, 2013
And then things started to get really awesome:
Science as a Lightning Bug in the Dark #insectsagan—
Leah Crane (@DownhereonEarth) May 28, 2013
We're made of star stuff… and chitin. #insectsagan—
Karen James (@kejames) May 28, 2013
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to scurry away when the light is turned on." #insectsagan @kejames @bug_girl @DrMRFrancis—
Alex Parker (@Alex_Parker) May 28, 2013
The Dragonflies of Eden. #InsectSagan—
Alex Parker (@Alex_Parker) May 28, 2013
"For small creatures such as we, the vastness is bearable only through love and picnic crumbs." #insectsagan @kejames @bug_girl @DrMRFrancis—
Alex Parker (@Alex_Parker) May 28, 2013
Recently, we've waded a little way out, maybe tarsus-deep, and the water seems inviting. #insectsagan—
Karen James (@kejames) May 28, 2013
Broca's protocerebrum, deutocerebrum, and tritocerebrum. #InsectSagan—
Alex Parker (@Alex_Parker) May 28, 2013
Consider again that bot. #insectsagan—
Karen James (@kejames) May 28, 2013
"We are like butterflies who flutter for a day and think it is forever." #InsectSagan #ActualSagan—
Alex Parker (@Alex_Parker) May 28, 2013
Related Posts:
How to become a social media goddess in 4 not very easy steps
Time for Cicadas!
They’re HERE! The East Coast of the US is in the middle of a noisy invasion…. by completely harmless insects.
Cicadas spend most of their life underground sucking on the the roots of trees, until it is time to emerge as flying adults. There are over 1,000 species of cicadas around the world, with varying life cycles. Periodical cicadas are known for their 17- or 13-year synchronized life cycles and loud singing choruses. These cicadas have black bodies, red eyes, and the wonderful Genus name Magicicada. They are indeed magical, and being in the middle of a periodical brood emergence is a special experience!
What’s a brood? Periodical cicadas exist in different regions, and have cycles of emergence that are not in sync. There are 12 groups of Magicicadas with 17 year life cycles, and 3 groups of Magicicadas with 13 year life cycles. Oh, and to make that more confusing? There are 7 species of Magicicada. Brood II is emerging this year–you can see the full US Brood II Map here.
There is a wonderful video about the periodicial cicada life cycle that is up at Kickstarter; enjoy!
Don’t live on the east coast, or in one of the emergence areas? You still might have dog-day cicadas! While the 17-year cicadas get a lot of press, there are also yearly cicadas. In the US, these are all in the Genus Tibicen (Latin for “flute player”). The species I hear most is Tibicen canicularus. These cicadas have life cycles of about 3 years, but broods overlap so adults emerge each year. They don’t emerge in large numbers like the periodical cicadas, and they are more cryptically colored (and bigger!).

Entomological Trivia:
Possibly the only time cicadas have been used in a felony?
I hope that someday I can write a sentence as wonderful as “Two men walked in brandishing a cicada.”
Related posts:
What is Natural Selection?
Hurray! There is another video in the wonderful collaboration between Stated Clearly and Bird and Moon comics!!
Also, amazingly, I seem to have posted the earlier video about Evolution over at Skepchick, but not here! Check it out. It’s even more adorable than the Natural Selection one.
Wrong on the Internet: Bogus USA Spider Chart
This poster created by a pest control company claims to show dangerous American spiders. It is full of bad information. Half of the species on this chart don’t even occur in the USA. Please, don’t share it anymore!
Please don’t rely on this chart for meaningful information about American spiders. This chart is the result of a clever company re-purposing something they put together for Australia. Seriously; the Australian spider chart is exactly the same! And, frankly, the info isn’t all that accurate for Australians, either.
This post will address the parts of this poster that are wrong (pretty much all of it), and then suggest some resources for accurate information about American spiders.
Info that is completely wrong on the poster:
- Mouse spider: does not occur in the US. Mouse spiders are not aggressive, and often “dry bite” when disturbed. In other words, most of the time they don’t even inject venom!
- Black House Spider: does not occur in the US. Also, known to be timid and not dangerous.
- St. Andrew’s Cross Spider: Does not occur in the US. Harmless.
Info that is mostly wrong on the poster:
- Hobo spider: the species pictured does not occur in the US. We have some spiders called hobo spiders, but they are not the same species as the Australian one with a scary bite. Introduced hobo spiders in the US don’t seem to have venom as toxic as the rumors. In fact, a recent study of the introduced hobo species found they were fairly harmless.
- Brown Recluse: This is actually a complex of up to 6 different species of spider, and they do not occur in all areas of the US. There is a complex mythology about the bite of the brown recluse. Research suggests that the bite, while not pleasant, is not a pathway to nasty necrosis. A lot of other things cause necrosis of the skin, which is often blamed on a hapless spider.
- Wolf spiders: Lots of wolf spiders occur in the US, but they are of minimal medical importance. No serious medical consequences of a wolf spider bite has been reported, and their bite is not painful or toxic.
Information that is slightly right on the poster:
- Garden orb-weaving spiders do occur in the US, and are beneficial and harmless.
- Huntsman spiders: the species in the photo does not occur in the US. We have some huntsman spiders, but they are much more modestly sized than the Australian and tropical versions. Harmless unless provoked, and even then pretty harmless.
- Trap Door spiders do occur in the US, although not the species pictured. They are harmless and fascinating!
- Black Widow Spiders do have a toxic bite, and do occur in the US, but that’s about as far as the correctness goes. There are 5 different Widow species in the US, and Black Widow bites are not lethal to humans. In fact, as of 2011, there are no known reported deaths from black widow bites in the US. Black widow spider bites can cause muscle cramping and abdominal pain in some people; pregnant women and children are most at risk.
To sum up: This poster is unhelpful and mostly filled with bullshit with regards to US spiders. Don’t rely on it, and don’t share it.
How can you know what information online about spiders is good information?
Easy! Go to your local Extension website. In the United States, every single state has an Extension service (or did until state budget cuts a few years ago, anyway).
“Each U.S. state and territory has a state office at its land-grant university and a network of local or regional offices. These offices are staffed by one or more experts who provide useful, practical, and research-based information to agricultural producers, small business owners, youth, consumers, and others in communities of all sizes.”
The Extension Service is charged by the USDA and each state government with producing factual, well-researched information for consumer use. You can tell you are on an Extension website because it will be affiliated with a land-grant university, and have a .edu web address. So, for example, searching for “Nebraska fact sheet spiders” gives me this information specific to that state (and also some tips about keeping a wolf spider as a pet!).
There are amazing, free resources available to you. Use them! And look for that .edu web address. Don’t listen to stories of a friend who knows a friend who lost their Aunt Gertie to a giant toxic banana spider that was in a pack of underpants. Seek out reliable information.
Some actual helpful, authoritative resources about American spiders:
- Spiders do not bite. Some common sense about spiders from an expert. A Must Read!
- Real, peer-reviewed info about American Spiders
- Common spiders of the East Coast
- Seriously, you weren’t bitten by a brown recluse
- How to identify a Hobo spider (PDF)
- Sac spiders don’t really make webs in your scrotum.
A personal note:
I just finished a move across country. As part of this move, I had to clean out the space behind my washing machine. I was hunkered over shelves, trying to wipe things off, and when I stood up I’m fairly sure that my entire head was covered in cobwebs. I…may have let out a sound of a frequency last produced by Little Richard hitting one of his high notes.
I mention this to let you know that even bug people get the heebie jeebies around spiders sometimes. It’s ok to not like spiders as long as you remember the vast majority of spiders are your friends. You don’t have to kill them! They are valuable (and free!) pest control for your yard and garden. Unless there is something seriously wrong with your personal hygiene, spiders have no interest in living on you or in you. Try to live and let live.



