A New Global Citizen Science Project Focused on Moths

TAR Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200 brill.com/tar

National Moth Week - a new global citizen science project focused on moths

David Moskowitz1 and Liti Haramaty2 1EcolSciences, Inc. 75 Fleetwood Drive, Suite 250, Rockaway, New Jersey, USA, and Department of Entomology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA e-mail: [email protected] 2Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA e-mail: [email protected] Received on January 22, 2013. Accepted on February 9, 2013. Final version received on April 4, 2013

Summary National Moth Week is a global citizen science project focusing on moths. During the first National Moth Week, which took place in July 2012, people in over 300 locations worldwide observed and documented the presence of moths in various habitats. This article describes the project’s goals and the methods used to achieve those goals. A summary of outreach activities and data collection is presented.

Keywords Moth; Lepidoptera; Citizen Science; National Moth Week

Introduction Scientific contributions by non-professionals are well documented, particularly in fields of study where observation is important, such as archaeology, astronomy, and natural history (Silvertown, 2009). In Entomology there is also a vast body of research and publications that utilize data and observations collected by non-professionals (citizen scientists) (ECLS 2012; Miller, 1986; Kristensen et al., 2007). Moth biodiversity is remarkably high as these insects are one of the most successful lineages of organisms on earth (Kristensen et al., 2007, Schweitzer et al., 2011). As a result of ongoing survey efforts, estimates of the number of species approximate 150,000 (Arnett, 2000, van Nieukerken et al., 2011) to possibly as many as 500,000 (Kristensen et al., 2007). New species are regularly being discovered, and in many places surveys are inadequate or simply have not yet been conducted (Wagner, 2000). Even for common species in

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2013 DOI 10.1163/18749836-06021065 186 D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200 more populated areas, knowledge of their distribution and ecology is often lacking (D. Wagner and J. Pickering, personal communication). Global climate change and habitat destruction create an urgency to map moth species’ distributions and describe their phenology (J. Pickering, personal communication). Until recently, resources for moth identification were limited to highly technical manuals and journals not readily accessible to the general public and were far from comprehensive for the order. With the growth of the internet, a vast array of resources is now available to anyone with a computer and internet access. Many of these are photograph-based, allowing for rela- tively easy visual comparisons and identification. While photograph-based identifications may present some problems for many species, a large number of moths can be identified in this manner (Patterson, 2012). In addition, the advent of natural history based data-collecting sites, with both regional and global reach such as Project Noah (www.projectnoah.org), BAMONA (www.butterfliesandmoths.org), Discover Life (www.discoverlife.org/moth) and BugGuide (www.bugguide.net), create a venue for anyone to submit data on moths they have found. Numerous Citizen Science projects around the world are now engaging amateurs and non-professionals to collect data about a broad suite of environmental issues and natural history aspects (ESA 2012). The combination of new and readily accessible identification resources, data-collecting sites, and the lack of information for many species combine to provide an excellent opportunity for non-professional citizen scientists to make meaningful scientific contributions about moths. National Moth Week provides a global venue for these efforts by creating a platform focused on awareness, appreciation and data collection of moths.

The first National Moth Week The first annual National Moth Week (NMW) was held 23-29 July 2012. It was inspired by and broadly patterned after Moth Night (www.mothnight.info), the highly successful annual moth recording program held throughout Britain and Ireland for the past decade. National Moth Week grew from public moth nights conducted by a non-profit environmental group, the Friends of the East Brunswick Environmental Commission (www.friendsebec.com), in parks in East Brunswick, New Jersey, USA. These moth nights have been held a few times each summer since 2006. The focus of these activities is to spotlight moths and other nocturnal biodiversity in a fun and largely non-technical way. Black lights, mercury vapor lights and bait trails are used to demonstrate the various ways that moths can be attracted for observation and study. The moth nights are typically well attended by families, and for many people this is the first positive encounter with moths and other insects. National Moth Week was envisioned as a way to capitalize on these positive experi- ences and as a way to collect and report meaningful data on moths across a wide geographic area. National Moth Week was originally envisioned as a largely North American event with the hope of having at least one moth night in each state (Fig. 1 A). A logo to convey the United States focused event was created and widely distributed. However, somewhat surprisingly, there was also significant interest from across the world, and the focus was quickly shifted to a more global perspective. As a result, it was D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200 187

(A)

(B) Figure 1. (A) The first NMW logo featuring an image of a male Io moth, Automeris io (Fabricius, 1775) (Saturniidae) superimposed on a map of the USA with an image of the night sky as the background. (B) The logo for future NMW using the same image of an Io moth with a globe in the background. This figure is published in color in the online version. realized that a new logo would be needed that illustrated the international context of National Moth Week (Fig. 1). The first annual National Moth Week was very successful with 307 registered locations in 49 states in the United States and in 29 other countries (Fig. 2). Fifty- nine of the registered locations reported multiple events during the week, with half of all registered events being public. Participation was extremely diverse ranging from individuals and families looking for moths in their own backyards or local parks to conservation organizations and state agencies holding well-advertised public events. 188 D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200

Australia Private Bhutan Bulgaria Public Canada Chile Colombia Costa Rica Croatia Czech Republic France Germany India Indonesia Israel Italy Jamaica Kenya Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Portugal Portugal[azores] Russia Slovakia South Africa Sri Lanka e Gambia United Kingdom USA (Puerto Rico) Venezuela United States 125 120

0 246810 12 14 16 18 20 Number of registered locations

Figure 2. Number of registered National Moth Week event locations. United States bars are not to scale with number of events noted on the bars.National Moth Week locations were from inner cities such as downtown Manhattan (New York City, New York), to remote places in Costa Rica, Kenya, Gambia and elsewhere. This figure is published in color in the online version.

The National Moth Week events were highly varied: nocturnal moth nights with lights and bait; PowerPoint presentations on moths and their ecology; daytime walks to search for caterpillars and moths; talks about the impact of artificial lights on moths and daytime walks to search these lights for moths; and moth parties replete with moth-themed foods and special access to moth collections at Cornell University (Figs 3-5).

Partners/data collection One of the most important goals of National Moth Week is to generate data about moths. Non-professionals have a long history of collecting valuable data about the natural world, and Citizen Science projects are a modern incarnation of those efforts (Miller-Rushing et al., 2012). From the start, a primary focus of National Moth Week D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200 189

Figure 3. National Moth Week moth nights. (A) Athol, MA, USA; photo credit: Dave Small. (B) Elk Pine Woods, East Brunswick, NJ, USA; photo credit: Friends EBEC. (C) Broad Meadow Brook, Worcester, MA, USA; photo credit: Dave Small. (D) NJ Meadowlands Commission, Lyndhurst, NJ, USA; photo credit: Friends EBEC. (E) Frost Woods Park, East Brunswick, NJ, USA; photo credit: Leah Frederick. (F) Frost Woods Park, East Brunswick, NJ, USA; photo credit: Leah Frederick. This figure is published in color in the online version.

is to expand the understanding of moth distribution and ecology as well as fostering an appreciation and awareness of moths and their biodiversity. For many species including many common ones, even the most basic distributional data and life history information are lacking for many areas. We hope that National Moth Week can help to fill in some of these gaps given the broad geographic participation. Successful Citizen Science projects have been implemented for other insects including monarch butterflies (Oberhauser 2012), ladybugs (LLBP 2012), crickets and katydids (Discover Life 190 D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200

Figure 4. National Moth Week moth night 27-28 July, 2012 in the Bonanza Creek Experimental Forest near Fairbanks, Alaska (A, B). Moths collected at these locations by Kenelm Philip (C), and by Jim Kruse (D). Photo credits: Kenelm Philip and Jim Kruse. This figure is published in color in the online version.

2009), bees (BeeSpotter 2012) and dragonflies (Xerces 2012). Moths have also been the focus of highly successful Citizen Science survey projects but on a regional basis (Butterfly Conservation 2012, GMS 2012, MothNight 2012). In order to facilitate data collection of moths, National Moth Week partnered with Discover Life, Butterflies and Moths of North America (BAMONA), Project Noah, BugGuide, and Moth Photographers Group (MPG). These internet sites are reposito- ries for data and photographs about moths and other organisms. All of these organizations screen submissions in various ways to insure the accuracy of identifications. The digital photograph and accompanying data also remain available for further examina- tion. The effort at data collection during National Moth Week was successful with more than 3,500 submissions to these natural history data sites. The partner organizations that collect data limited to North America received over 2,000 submissions. Close to a thousand (972) moth photos were uploaded into Discover Life’s albums; Bug Guide received 927 submissions (It is not possible to directly determine their D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200 191

Figure 5. (A) A moth shaped potato, steak and corn dish prepared by a family in Massachusetts, USA for their first National Moth Week event; photo credit: Alan Moskowitz. (B) A street artist in Ottawa, Canada, painting a Luna Moth in celebration of National Moth Week; see more at http://nationalmothweek.org/?s=ottawa; photo credit: Jim des Rivieres, www.moths.ca. This figure is published in color in the online version.

connection to National Moth Week); and 421 photos were added to the BAMONA website. Only limited data were submitted to MPG despite the fact that it is one of the most comprehensive online resources for the identification and data about moths in the New World. One possible explanation for this is that the other partner-sites actively solicit data submissions, whereas MPG takes a largely passive approach. If this is accu- rate, it suggests that the success of Citizen Science projects may benefit from active engagement with participants. ‘Spottings’ from around the world were added to Project Noah through its global “Moths of the World” mission. Reports of 684 ‘spottings’ came from 30 countries on all continents (except for Antarctica) (Table 1).

Incentives to participation National Moth Week and their Partners explored various ways to increase participation and to stimulate interest in the inaugural event. National Moth Week partnered with a number of major nature authors and provided participants the opportunity to win a signed copy of their books. Other nature books that were out of print or difficult to obtain were also offered by National Moth Week (Table 2). Other Partners provided further incentives such as the entomology supply house, BioQuip (www.bioquip.com), that offered moth-related product discounts during National Moth Week and included a flier advertising the promotion in all shipped orders. Discover Life offered a $100 prize for one participant who submitted to an album. Project Noah also created a special National Moth Week digital patch for anyone contributing a moth observation (Fig. 6) 192 D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200

Table 1. Number of submissions (‘spottings’) to Project Noah by continent and country. Continent Country # of Spottings Africa 3 Nigeria 1 South Africa 2 Asia 120 Bhutan 42 India 33 Indonesia 1 Japan 3 Malaysia 9 Pakistan 1 Philippines 10 Sri Lanka 21 Australia 16 Australia 16 Europe 84 Austria 3 Belgium 1 Croatia 18 France 3 Germany 1 Norway 5 Portugal 15 Slovakia 2 Spain 24 Switzerland 2 The Netherlands 6 United Kingdom 4

North America 432 Canada 55 Costa Rica 4 Mexico 37 Panama 3 USA 333 South America 29 Brazil 5 Colombia 24 Project Noah Total 684 D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200 193

Table 2. Book prizes for NMW participants. Books donated by authors Jim Arnosky - Crinkleroot’s Guide to Knowing Butterflies and Moths John Himmelman - Discovering Moths: Nighttime Jewels in Your Own Backyard Seabrooke Leckie - Peterson Field Guide to Moths of Eastern North America Jim Sogaard - Moths & Caterpillars of the North Woods David Wagner - Caterpillars of Eastern North America David Wagner - Owlet Caterpillars of Eastern North America

Books donated by National Moth Week W.J. Holland - The Moth Book: A Popular Guide to a Knowledge of the Moths of North America. Rare, Declining, and Poorly Known Butterflies and Moths (Lepidoptera) of Forests and Woodlands in the Eastern United States. Butterflies and Moths of Pacific Northwest Forests and Woodlands: Rare, Endangered, and Management-Sensitive Species.

Figure 6. Moth “spottings” submitted to the Project Noah Moth Mission (A-C) and the Project Noah Moth Week Digital Patch (D). (A) Leopard Moth (Pantherodes pardalis) from Pereira, Quindío, Colombia, spotted on July 24, 2012 by Carolina Holguin. (B) Ghost Moth (Trichophassus giganteus) from Morretes, Parana, Brazil, July 24, 2012, spotted by Sergio Monteiro. (C) Lesser Pink-and-Green Hawk Moth (Callambulyx sp.) from Thimphu, Bhutan, spotted on July 23, 2012 by Irungbam Jatishwor Singh. (D) Project Noah Moth Week digital patch. This figure is published in color in the online version. 194 D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200

Figure 7. Certificate of participation in the National Moth Week. This figure is published in color in the online version. during the week only. National Moth Week also provided the opportunity for any organization to write an article spotlighting their event that was posted on the website’s blog and linked to Facebook pages and Twitter. After National Moth Week, all registered participants received a certificate for their participation (Fig. 7). A Resolution (S.R. 70) to establish the last week in July of each year as National Moth Week was also proposed by United States Senator Menendez and was co-sponsored by United States Senator Lautenberg (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/sres70/text).

National Moth Week and social media One of the primary goals of National Moth Week was to connect people around the world with an interest in moths (Fig. 8). The internet and social media have simplified these connections and are important tools for Citizen Science projects with broad geographic reach (Laursen, 2010). In order to create a readily accessible portal for National Moth Week events, and to promote connectivity of people and groups, a website and Facebook page were created. The website (www.nationalmothweek.org) provided searchable maps and links to all registered events allowing anyone interested D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200 195

Figure 8. Letter from Congressman Rush Holt on creating a mothing community. 196 D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200

Figure 9. Image of the interactive Google map showing NMW event locations. Green markers are public events. Blue markers are private events. Information on each event is visible by clicking on a marker. This figure is published in color in the online version. to find a nearby event. Markers on the maps were clickable leading to information and contacts for each event. Green markers were for Public events and Blue markers for Private events (Fig. 9). The website also contains information on ‘how to moth’ and a blog section with articles about mothing, information and links for NMW partners, moth related news and guest posts by participants around the world. The Facebook page (www.facebook.com/pages/National-Moth-Week/224810697582268?ref=hlserved) as outlet for participants to post photos and event information and for the National Moth Week team to rapidly disseminate moth and event related information. The Facebook page and a NMW Twitter (@moth_week) account are linked to the website’s blog and a link to every blog post gets published on Facebook and Twitter. The website and Facebook pages were highly successful as portals for National Moth Week information during the event and have continued to be well-visited following the event. The website has currently received more than 60,000 visits and almost 590,000 page visits (Fig. 10) from 89 different countries. The Facebook page has close to 1,900 ‘likes’ from 46 countries (Table 3), and during National Moth Week had a “Reach” of more than one million (Reach indicates how many people have seen any content on the page) (Fig. 11). The NMW Twitter feed has over 200 followers from all over the world, including nature reporters, scientists and educators. The NMW twits are regularly re-twitted by followers who themselves have thousands of followers. A second Facebook page focused on caterpillars was created after NMW and currently has more than 200 ‘likes’ (www.facebook.com/NationalMothWeekCaterpillars?ref =hl). A NMW Flicker group (www.flickr.com/search/?q=national%20moth%20week) provides a platform for participants to post photographs of setups, moth’ers and moths observed during NMW events. D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200 197

20,000

17,500

15,000

12,500

10,000

7,500

5,000

Number of monthly clikcs 2012 2,500

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug SepOct Nov Dec

Figure 10. Number of visitors to www.nationalmothweek.org during 2012 showing the spike corre- sponding to the event.

Table 3. Number of ‘Likes’ on the Facebook page by country. Country Number of Country Number of Country Number of ‘Likes’ ‘Likes’ ‘Likes’ Algeria 3 Germany 7 Saudi Arabia 3 Argentina 16 Greece 3 Singapore 2 Australia 13 Hungary 7 Slovakia 3 Bangladesh 233 India 30 Slovenia 2 Belize 2 Indonesia 27 Spain 5 Bolivia 3 Iraq 2 Sweden 2 Brazil 37 Israel 4 Syria 4 Cambodia 3 Italy 14 Taiwan 7 Canada 19 Malaysia 16 Thailand 9 Chile 13 Maldives 3 Turkey 6 Colombia 27 Mexico 53 United 41 Kingdom Costa Rica 7 Pakistan 3 United States 633 Croatia 2 Peru 3 Venezuela 5 Egypt 36 Philippines 48 Vietnam 3 France 4 Portugal 13 Zimbabwe 3

Conclusion Moths may be the perfect organisms for Citizen Scientists to contribute meaningful observations and data from around the world. Numerous factors contribute to this: their incredible diversity; a lack of complete distributional and life-history information about many, if not most species; occurrence in virtually every habitat; ease of observation 198 D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200

1750 400

1500 s 1250 300

1000 ared storie

200 sh er of 'Likes' 750 mb 500 Nu 100

250 Number of 0 0 April 1, 2012 May 11, 2012 June 20, 2012 July 30, 2012 September 8, 2012October 18, 2012 November 27, 2012January 6, 2013

Number of 'Likes' Number of people who shared stories

Figure 11. Number of ‘Likes’ on the main NMW Facebook page, and number of Facebook members who shared stories from the NMW page. This figure is published in color in the online version. of many species, and new internet resources for data submission and identification. The success of the first National Moth Week, regional moth monitoring programs in the United Kingdom and Ireland and India and the growth of many moth-oriented websites also demonstrates that moths are of interest to a wide range of people across the world. The ability to link these individuals via the internet with their shared common interests through National Moth Week and other similar global Citizen Science projects suggests the opportunity to tap a vast resource to help scientists understand moths and the natural world around us. This is evident by the success of the first National Moth Week in both number of events, worldwide participation and submissions of observations to scientific data bases.

Acknowledgements The success of the first National Moth Week is due to many individuals and organizations around the world. First and foremost are the National Moth Week Board members, Todd J. Dreyer, Elena Tartaglia and Dan Ford, who gave countless hours to the project. Without their work, the event would never have achieved the success or accomplished the goals it did. We also cannot adequately express how important our Partners and Sponsors were to the success of National Moth Week, especially Nancy Lowe and John Pickering from Discover Life; Yasser Ansari, Jacob Gorneau and Karen Loughrey from Project Noah; Kelly Lotts and Thomas Naberhaus from BAMONA; John VanDyke from BugGuide; and the Lepidopterist’s Society, Great appreciation is also due to all of the individuals and organizations that helped promote the event in so D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200 199 many ways. The measure of their success is in all of the moth nights and programs that enriched anyone attending and the scientific contributions that were made. A huge thank you is also due to the authors that generously donated books for National Moth Week. We also thank EcolSciences, Inc., ipadwallbracket.com, and the Friends of the East Brunswick Environmental Commission for providing resources and support. Two anonymous reviewers also provided comments and suggestions that improved this paper. We also thank Sam Moskowitz for his help with the photograph plates. And finally, we would like to thank all of our friends and family for their constant support even when every conversation turned to National Moth Week.

References ArnettR.H. Jr. 2000. American Insects: A handbook of the insects of America north of Mexico. Second Edition. CRC Press. Boca Raton, Florida. 1001 pp. BeeSpotter. 2012. The BeeSpotter Project. Retrieved on January 10, 2013 from http://beespotter.mste .illinois.edu/. Butterfly Conservation. 2012. Moths Count. Retrieved on January 13, 2012 from http://www .mothscount.org/. Discover Life 2009. NYC Cricket Crawl. Retrieved on January 10, 2013 from http://www.discoverlife .org/cricket/. Executive Council of the Lepidopterists’ Society (ECLS). 2012. Lepidopterists’ Society Executive Council petition to U.S.F&W Service on proposed listing of five species of blues in the Spring Mountains, Nevada. News of the Lepidopterists’ Society 54(4):15–16. Friends of the East Brunswick Environmental Commission 2012. Retrieved on January 13, 2013 from www.friendsebec.com Garden Moth Scheme 2012. The garden moth scheme. Retrieved on January 13, 2013 from http://gms .staffs-ecology.org.uk/index.php. Kristensen, N. M. Scoble and O. Karsholt. 2007. Lepidoptera phylogeny and systematics: the state of inventorying moth and butterfly diversity. Zootaxa 1668: 699–747. Laursen, L. 2010. Collaborating with Citizen Scientists. Science. June 25, 2010. Retrieved on January 10, 2012 from http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2010_06 _25/caredit.a1000065 Miller, L. 1986. Presidential Address, 1984: A tribute to the amateur. Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society. 40(1): 1–7. Miller-Rushing, A., R. Primack, and R. Bonney. 2012. The history of public participation in ecological research. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 10(6): 285–290. MothNight 2012. Retrieved on January 13, 2013 from http://www.mothnight.info/www/. Oberhauser, K. 2012. Monitoring Monarchs: Citizen Science and a charismatic insect in citizen science public participation in environmental research (J. Dickinson and R. Bonney, Editors). Cornell University Press. Ithaca, New York, USA. 304pp. Patterson, B. 2012. Moth Photographers Group. A walk through the moth families - Getting started with moths Retrieved from http://mothphotographersgroup.msstate.edu/WalkThroughIndex.shtml on January 9, 2012. Schweitzer, D. F., M. Minno and D. Wagner. 2011. Rare, declining, and poorly known butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera) of forests and woodlands in the eastern United States. USDA Forest Service Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team. Morgan, West Virginia, USA. 517 pp. Silvertown, J. 2009. A new dawn for citizen science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24 (9):467–201. The Ecological Society of America (ESA). 2012. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment: Special Issue: Citizen Science – new pathways to public involvement in research. V. 10(6). 200 D. Moskowitz and L. Haramaty / Terrestrial Arthropod Reviews 6 (2013) 185–200

The Lost Ladybug Project (LLBP) 2012. Retrieved on January 10, 2013 from http://www.lostladybug .org/about.php. The Xerces Society (2012). Migratory Dragonfly Partnership. Retrieved on January 10, 2013 from http:// www.xerces.org/dragonfly-migration/. Van Nieukerken et al. 2011.”Order Lepidoptera Linnaeus, 1758. In, Zhang, Z.-Q. (Editor) Animal biodiversity: An outline of higher-level classification and survey of taxonomic richness. Zootaxa 3148: 212–221. http://mapress.com/zootaxa/2011/f/zt03148p221.pdf. Wagner, D. L. 2000. The biodiversity of moths. pp. 249–270. In, The Encyclopedia of Biodiversity. S. A Levin et al. (Editors). Academic Press, San Diego, California. 5 v.