DOCSLIB.ORG

Gatekeepers in the Food Industry: Acceptability of Edible Insects

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gatekeepers in the Food Industry: Acceptability of Edible Insects Wageningen Academic Journal of Insects as Food and Feed, 2020; 6(3): 231-243 Publishers Gatekeepers in the food industry: acceptability of edible insects H.J. Hunts1, F.V. Dunkel2*, M.J. Thienes3 and N.B. Carnegie4 1Montana State University, Department of Health and Human Development, 222 Herrick Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA; 2Montana State University, Department of Plant Sciences and Plant Pathology, 119 Plant BioSciences, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA; 3Montana State University, Department of Ecology, 310 Lewis Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA; 4Montana State University, Department of Mathematics, 240 Wilson Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA; [email protected] Received: 26 November 2018 / Accepted: 7 August 2019 © 2019 Wageningen Academic Publishers OPEN ACCESS RESEARCH ARTICLE Abstract For billions of consumers around the world, insects are not only considered edible, they are considered delicious! Currently, in the United States, there is a distinct movement from ‘yuck’ to ‘yum’ in terms of insects as food. This movement towards acceptance can be seen in the market-demand for edible insects, but the pace of the demand is modified by the level to which key gatekeepers in education, research, and the food industry are providing supportive information to consumers. In this paper, we hypothesised that there would be differences in the perceptions of edible insect acceptability across three gatekeeper groups, entomologists (specifically, members of the North Central Branch of the Entomological Society of America), food technologists (specifically, members of the Southern California Institute for Food Technology), and secondary family and consumer sciences teachers (specifically, members of the Montana Association of Family and Consumer Sciences). Further, we hypothesised that nutrition and environmental information would be the most important among entomologists. We exposed each group to information and tasting opportunities. Our findings supported our hypotheses with statistically significant differences using the Fisher’s exact test across the three gatekeeper groups in terms of acceptability (P-values of less than 0.01 in all pairings; P=1.003e-12 overall). We found differences between entomologists and family and consumer sciences (FCS) teachers in the importance of nutrition as a factor (P=0.014) but not between other pairings. Environmental impact information was statistically different across the groups (P=0.024) and statistically significant in FCS teachers compared to the other groups but not food technologists versus entomologists (P=0.95). We offer theoretical reasons why differences exist and offer suggestions on how we can move towards more acceptance among gatekeepers leading to more support for consumer demand. Keywords: preferences, food technologists, entomologists, family consumer sciences, adoption of innovations 1. Introduction food worldwide, nutritional benefits of insects, and low environmental impact of raising insects as a major protein Acceptability of insects as a food source is increasing in the source for humans. This paper explores the concept that United States (USA). In addition to the Native Americans/ significant differences in acceptability of insects as food Alaskan Natives, Asian-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, may exist across groups of gatekeeping professionals in African Americans, and Pacific and Hawaiian Islanders, education, research and the USA food industry and that Americans of European descent are also including insects this might affect these professionals’ sharing of information in their diets. However, the novelty of ready-to-eat insects, about food insects as part of an everyday diet. This concept expense of available products, and associated ‘yuck factor’ may explain similar situations in Canada, Australia, and are important barriers to mainstream adoption of insects Europe. as food in the USA. Consumers may be willing to change their mind about their personal acceptability of insects as Controlling, usually limiting, general access to something food if they are given information about uses of insects as is considered gatekeeping (https://en.oxforddictionaries. ISSN 2352-4588 online, DOI 10.3920/JIFF2018.0045 231 H.J. Hunts et al. com/definition/gatekeeping). Cultural gatekeeping is a insects which is a complete, high quality protein source, that function or system that ignores, controls access to, or places is superior to the maize, sorghum, and millet the locusts a negative value on practices of cultures other than one’s ate. It is not necessary that gatekeepers themselves choose own. In the case of food crops, specifically edible insects, to consume insects. It is necessary that gatekeepers accept this has had serious consequences worldwide, particularly the fact that over 2000 species of insects are deliberately in sub-Saharan Africa in the 20th century (Dunkel, 2017: included in the diets of one third of the world’s human p. 29-34). As early as the 1930’s members of the United population, that is, cultures in Asia, the Americas, Africa, Nations (UN) waged an ‘international war on locusts’ and Australia (Van Huis et al., 2013) and that a new industry (Nature, 1938). For almost 90 years the United Nations in the USA and Europe is trying to emerge based on these Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has focused on cultural practices. Meanwhile the edible insect industry solving malnutrition including stunting and kwashiorkor has entered an exponential growth phase from a worldwide (protein deficiency). A seemingly reasonable approach to value of $ 16 million in 2012, to $ 33 million in 2015, now preventing malnutrition was to try and maximise crop projected by market analysts to grow to $ 523 million in yields. To that end, entomologists from Germany, France, 2023 (GMI, 2017). Work by Meticulous Research (as cited UK, Belgium and the USA waged an ‘international war by Reuters, 2018) suggests that the global edible insect on locusts’ using chemical pesticides. This war cost the market will hit nearly 1.2 billion in 2023. Gatekeepers, international community 600 million USD (United States for example, hold the key to help start new businesses, dollars) for just one of the 3-year campaigns (DeVreyer et fund programs at the United Nations FAO, suggest food al., 2012). A price tag that, at the time, seemed like money legislation that paves the way for this nascent industry well spent. growing exponentially to expand, and make way for insects to be recognised as food in the design of elementary, The war on locusts ignored the fact that edible insects, secondary, and university curricula. primarily locusts, grasshoppers and other orthopterans were important sources of protein and traditional snacks for the Compatibility of an innovation, meaning how an innovation children of sub-Saharan Africa. Apparently unbeknownst fits in with what is normal or acceptable in a social system, to entomologists at the time, local edible insects are far is positively related to its rate of adoption (Rogers, 2003: p. superior in nutrition to the crops that entomologists were 266). In this case the innovation is ‘insect’ and we added trying so desperately to save. For example, more than 21% of an adjective ‘food.’ In traditional ecological knowledge the variegated grasshopper Zonocerus variegatus (Ademolu systems of Europeans and those of European derivation, et al., 2010) is protein whereas raw millet is comprised this is an oxymoron. To understand gatekeeping behaviour of just 11% protein (USDA, 2019). Additionally, there is regarding potential adopters which they influence, we must just 0.08 mg of calcium per gram of raw millet (USDA, understand perceptions of gatekeepers (Rogers, 2003: p. 2019) versus 1.8 mg of calcium per gram of Zonocerus 266). Their perceptions will determine the nature of the variegatus (Ademolu et al., 2010). Other insects, such as diffusion process of an innovation, in this case, food insects. caterpillars, are also effective at preventing stunting and anaemia according to a randomised trial conducted by Who are the gatekeepers? Bauserman et al. (2015) because they are a good source of iron and protein. It is not surprising that caterpillar protein A crucial choice in the entire innovation-development was superior given that raw millet has just 0.03 mg of iron process is the decision to begin diffusing an innovation to per gram (USDA, 2019). potential adopters (Rogers, 2003: p. 155), a decision lying in hands of gatekeepers. A 1995 study by the World Bank (Joffe, 1995) states ‘The rationale for control tends to be based as much on political The primary gatekeeper in the USA is the Food and Drug considerations and emotive arguments as any realistic Administration which regulates insects as food defects assessment of the risks to agricultural production and (contamination of food by insects), in terms of insect derived livelihoods.’ (p. ix). For almost a century, recessionary products (i.e. honey) and as insects as food and feed. Van and plagues larval bands and swarms of locusts have Huis et al. (2013) states ‘Regulatory frameworks governing been documented (Van Huis et al., 2007). Given the rapid food and feed chains have expanded tremendously in the local appearance of swarms and the high, well-balanced last 20 years; however, regulations governing insects as nutritional contents of this meat supply, it seems most food and feed sources are still largely absent. For developed reasonable to traditional mass gathering, drying, and countries, the absence of clear legislation and norms guiding storing techniques for this food and supply (Riley, 1873 as the use of insects as food and feed is among the major cited by Holt, 1885; Van Huis et al., 2013). In this case, the limiting factors hindering the industrial development of gatekeepers were entomologists who withheld nutritional farming insects to supply the food and feed sectors.’ A information from parents of these children (and their policy thorough review of regulation of insects as food in the USA makers) about their children’s traditional food source of is provided by Boyd (2019). 232 Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6(3) Gatekeepers in the food industry Another important gatekeeping group are educators.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bad Bugs: Warehouse Beetle
    Insects Limited, Inc. Pat Kelley, BCE Bad Bugs: Warehouse Beetle complaining customer. That is the nature of the Warehouse beetle. Let’s take a close look at this common stored product insect: The Warehouse beetle prefers feeding on animal protein. This could be anything from road kill to dog food to powdered cheese and milk. The beetle will feed on plant material but a dead insect or mouse would be its preferred food source. You will often find Warehouse beetles (Trogoderma spp.) feeding on dead insects. It is important to empty these lights on a regular basis. The larva (see figure) of the Warehouse beetle is approximately 1/4-inch-long Larval color varies from yellowish/white to dark brown as the larvae mature. Warehouse beetle larvae have two different tones of hairs on the posterior end. These guard hairs protect them against attack from the rear. The Warehouse beetle has about 1,706 hastisetae hairs If there is an insect that is truly a voracious feeder and about 2,196 spicisetae hairs according to a and a potential health hazard to humans and publication by George Okumura. Since a larva sheds young animals, the Warehouse beetle falls into that its hairs during each molt, the damage of this pest category because of the long list of foods that it insect comes from the 1000’s of these pointed hairs attacks. Next to the dreaded quarantine pest, that escape and enter a finished food product as an the Khapra beetle, it is the most serious stored insect fragment. These insect fragments then can be product insect pest with respect to health.
    [Show full text]
  • Butterfly Anatomy [Online]
    02 July 2015 (original version 01 January 2014) © Peter Eeles Citation: Eeles, P. (2015). Butterfly Anatomy [Online]. Available from http://www.dispar.org/reference.php?id=6 [Accessed July 2, 2015]. Butterfly Anatomy Peter Eeles This paper contains a condensed summary on the anatomy of the imago (adult), ovum (egg), larva (caterpillar) and pupa (chrysalis). Many of the features discussed on this page are referred to from the taxonomy section of the UK Butterflies website since they are used in butterfly classification. Imago The body of the adult butterfly is comprised of 3 segments - head, thorax and abdomen. The eyes, antennae, proboscis and palpi are all positioned on the head. The legs and wings are attached to the thorax. The reproductive organs and spiracles are part of the abdomen. All of these features are discussed in detail below and the illustrations below provide an overview of the majority of these features. Chequered Skipper (Carterocephalus palaemon) Photo © Pete Eeles Eyes The head contains a pair of compound eyes, each made up of a large number of photoreceptor units known as ommatidia. Each ommatidium includes a lens (the front of which makes up a single facet at the surface of the eye), light-sensitive visual cells and also cells that separate the ommatidium from its neighbours. The image below shows a closeup of the head of a Pyralid moth, clearly showing the facets on the surface of the eye. A butterfly is able to build up a complete picture of its surroundings by synthesising an image from the individual inputs provided by each ommatidium.
    [Show full text]
  • Territorial Defence in the Speckled Wood Butterfly (Pararge Aegeria) : the Resident Always Wins
    Anim. Behav., 1978,26, 138-147 TERRITORIAL DEFENCE IN THE SPECKLED WOOD BUTTERFLY (PARARGE AEGERIA) : THE RESIDENT ALWAYS WINS BY N. B. DAVIES Edward Grey Institute, Department of Zoology, Oxford Abstract. Males competed for territories, spots of sunlight on the ground layer of woodland, which were the best places for finding females . At any one time only 60% of the males had territories ; the remainder patrolled for females up in the tree canopy . Males continually flew down from the canopy and rapidly took over vacant sunspots . However, if the sunspot was already occupied, then the intruder was always driven back by the owner . Experiments showed that this was true even if the owner had been in occupation for only a few seconds . The rule for settling contests was thus `resident wins, intruder retreats' . Experiments showed that escalated contests only occurred when both contestants `thought' they were the resident . These results support the theoretical predictions of Maynard Smith & Parker (1976) . The reason intruders accept defeat immediately without a serious fight may be that contests are costly and territories abundant. How should an animal behave in a contest and insect contests provide a better scope for situation if it is to maximize its fitness? The this. answer is that it all depends on how the other In this paper I will show, by means of some contestants behave. Maynard Smith & Price simple field experiments, how territorial contests (1973) have shown that the strategy actually are settled in a species of butterfly . The results adopted will be an `evolutionarily stable strategy' are in accord with the predictions of Maynard or ESS.
    [Show full text]
  • Term Review of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 in Relation to Target 3A – Agriculture
    Service contract to support follow-up actions to the mid- term review of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020 in relation to target 3A – Agriculture Final Report 19th June 2017 Funded by European Commission, DG Environment In collaboration with 2 Disclaimer: The arguments expressed in this report are solely those of the authors, and do not reflect the opinion of any other party. The report as a whole should be cited as follows: Siriwardena, G. and Tucker, G. (eds) (2017) Service contract to support follow-up actions to the mid-term review of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020 in relation to target 3A – Agriculture. Report to the European Commission, Institute for European Environmental Policy, London. The following individual chapters should be cited as follows: Chapter 2: Siriwardena, G and Pringle, H (2017) Development of a methodology for the assessment of potential agriculture-related drivers on the status of habitats and species. In G Siriwardena & G Tucker (eds) Service contract to support follow-up actions to the mid-term review of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020 in relation to target 3A – Agriculture, pp 25-48. Report to the European Commission, Institute for European Environmental Policy, London. Chapter 3: Pringle, H, Koeble, R, Paracchini M L, Rega, C, Henderson, I, Noble, D, Gamero, A, Vorisek, P, Škorpilová, J, Schmucki, R, Siriwardena, G, Allen, B, and Tucker, G (2017) Review of data sources and preparation of a metadatabase. In G Siriwardena & G Tucker (eds) Service contract to support follow-up actions to the mid-term review of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020 in relation to target 3A – Agriculture, pp 49-60.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Radiation Is Improving the Biological Control of Insect Pests
    by Jorge Hendrichs and To Kill a Pest Alan Robinson The use of radiation is improving the biological control of insect pests. he IAEA’s support to Member States in What is Biological Control? the field of insect pest control has mainly Despite centuries of technological development, Tfocused on the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT), insect pests continue to exact a very high toll on which is a type of insect birth control, where mass agricultural production and human health. A well- reared and systematically released sterile males established, successful approach to this problem is of the target pest insect mate with wild females the use of natural enemies, called biological control in the field, thereby interfering in an environment- agents, to manage pest populations. The biological friendly way with the reproduction of the pest control agent can be a predator, a parasitoid, a bac- A giant ichneumon wasp population. This approach effectively reduces terium, a fungus or a virus. In this article we will con- adult boring the surface the use of insecticides and has been successfully centrate on predators, which eat the pest (prey), and of fir trunk infested with used to manage, and in some cases eradicate, parasitoids, which parasitize the pest (host) by sting- wood wasp larvae. populations of major pest insects. Nevertheless, ing and thereby laying eggs into it. (Photo: Boris Hrasovec, there are other areas where Member States can Faculty of Forestry, benefit from radiation in the field of entomology. When insects escape their native natural enemies, Bugwood.org) One of these is biological control.
    [Show full text]
  • Butterfly Monitoring Scheme
    BUTTERFLY MONITORING SCHEME Report to recorders 2004 The Butterfly Monitoring Scheme Report to Recorders 2004 J NICK GREATOREX-DAVIES & DAVID B ROY CEH Monks Wood Abbots Ripton Huntingdon Cambs PE28 2LS April 2005 CONTENTS Page SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 Origins, organisation and aims of the BMS 2 Sites gained 2 Lost sites regained 3 Sites lost 4 Distribution of sites 5 UPDATES ON THE CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OF THE 6 BMS AND TRANSECT RECORDING Development of transect recording 6 New BMS website 7 A new version of Transect Walker 8 SUMMARY OF THE 2001 SEASON 9 Weather summary for 2003 and 2004 9 Review of trends in 2004 9 Overall changes in abundance: another good year for butterflies 9 Overall changes in phenology 10 Changes in individual species: no highestor lowest indices 11 Spring species improved 11 Whites remain unchanged but Brimstone does well 11 Good year for Holly Blue but most other blues declined 12 A good year for fritillaries 12 Small Tortoiseshell fluctuations 12 A poorer year for migrants 13 Relatively small changes amongst the satyrids 13 Tabular summary of changes 2003 to 2004 14 COMPARISON OF THE 29 YEARS OF THE BMS 16 REFERENCES 17 PUBLICATIONS in 2004/5 17 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 18 APPENDIX I Collated indices graphs, 1976-2004 19 Page Figures Figure 1. Fluctuations in the mean index of abundance. 9 Figure 2. Variation in trends of generalist and specialist species measured from over 29 10 years (1976-2004). Figure 3. Trends towards earlier appearance of both spring and summer generations of 10 bi- or multivoltine species.
    [Show full text]
  • The Butterfly Handbook General Advice Note on Mitigating the Impacts of Roads on Butterfly Populations
    The butterfly handbook General advice note on mitigating the impacts of roads on butterfly populations working towards Natural England for people, places and nature The butterfly handbook General advice note on mitigating the impacts of roads on butterfly populations including a case study on mitigation for the Marsh Fritillary butterfly along the A30 Bodmin to Indian Queens road improvement scheme Adrian Spalding Spalding Associates (Environmental) Ltd Norfolk House 16-17 Lemon Street Truro TR1 2LS www.spaldingassociates.co.uk ISBN: 1 903798 25 6 This publication was jointly funded by English Nature and the Highways Agency Forward The second half of the last century saw dramatic changes in the countryside of Britain. Our native wildlife continues to be threatened as habitats are damaged or destroyed. Butterflies have probably never been as endangered as they are today following decades of loss of key semi-natural habitats such as flower-rich grasslands. This report is extremely valuable and timely as it concerns an increasingly important habitat for butterflies and other insects. Road verges can help conserve butterflies and other wildlife as they are an opportunity to provide suitable breeding habitats for many species, and provide crucial links between the patches of habitat that remain. Butterflies are highly sensitive indicators of the environment and we know that conservation measures for this group will help many other less well-known components of our biodiversity. Road verges already provide valuable habitats for a wide range of species but this report shows how they can be made even better and contribute an ever more important role in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies and Day Flying Moths of the Malvern Hills
    Butterflies and Day andDay Butterflies the Malvern Hills the Malvern Flying Moths of Mothsof Flying fl ying mothsoftheMalvern Hillstoencourage ‘A fullcolourguidetothebutterfl ‘A people toget outrecordingandtoidentify what theyfi nd.’ ies andday Photographs by David Armitage, Bridget Olesky, David Green and Alan Barnes Acknowledgements CONTENTS PAGE Compiled and edited by Susan Clarke and Jenny Joy, helped by many colleagues from Butterfl y Conservation, English Nature, Malvern Hills Introduction 3 AONB Offi ce, Malvern Hills Conservators as well as volunteers, landowners, Management of the Hills 4 The butterfl ies of the Malvern Hills 5 butterfl y and moth recorders, transect walkers and others who provided What are butterfl ies and moths? 5 material, information, advice and commented on the draft. Many thanks to: Why look for butterfl ies and day-fl ying moths? 5 David Armitage, Mike Bradley, Trevor Bucknall, Colin and Helen Dolding, Life cycle 6 Ian Duncan, David Green, Dr Gilbert Greenall, Cherry Greenway, Michael How to identify 7 Harper, Ian Hart, Rob Harvard, Peter Holmes, Chris Johnson, Richard When and where to look 7 Flight periods of butterfl ies and moths 9 Newton, Bridget Oleksy, John Tilt, Trevor Trueman, Gordon Whiting, Mike Sites to visit 10 Williams and Digby Wood. (map centre pages) Recording your sightings 11 Butterfl y research 12 Transect information 12 Species accounts 15 Small Skipper 15 Large Skipper 16 Brimstone 16 Large White, Small White & Green-veined White 16 Orange-tip 17 Green Hairstreak 17 White-letter Hairstreak 18 Small Copper 18 Common Blue 18 Holly Blue 19 Red Admiral, Small Tortoiseshell, Peacock & Comma 19 High Brown Fritillary 20 Silver-washed Fritillary 21 Speckled Wood 21 Marbled White 21 Grayling 22 Small Heath 22 Gatekeeper, Meadow Brown & Ringlet 23 Six-spot Burnet 24 Drab Looper 24 Hummingbird Hawkmoth 24 Scarlet Tiger 25 Cinnabar moth 25 Burnet Companion 25 Important information.
    [Show full text]
  • The Behaviour and Wing Morphology of The
    RADAR Research Archive and Digital Asset Repository The behaviour and wing morphology of the meadow brown butterfly (Maniola jurtina L.) in Britain: the influence of weather and location Celia Maier (1998) https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/items/5aa9edb0-b9dc-4819-bf36-72f5d3ba1f52/1/ Note if anything has been removed from thesis: published paper at end of thesis Copyright © and Moral Rights for this thesis are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. When referring to this work, the full bibliographic details must be given as follows: Maier, C (1998), The behaviour and wing morphology of the meadow brown butterfly (Maniola jurtina L.) in Britain : the influence of weather and location PhD, Oxford Brookes University WWW.BROOKES.AC.UK/GO/RADAR THE BEHAVIOUR AND WING MORPHOLOGY OF THE MEADOW BROWN BUTTERFLY (MANIOLA JURTINA L.) IN BRITAIN: THE INFLUENCE OF WEATHER AND LOCATION CELIA MAIER A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Oxford Brookes University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy April 1998 British Butterflies. w.s. Coleman, 1868 "THE MEADOW BROWN BUTTERFLY (Hipparchia Janira) Perhaps of all our butterflies this is the least attractive, being too common to excite interest from its rarity or difficulty of attainment, and too plain and homely to win regard.
    [Show full text]
  • North Wales Branch Newsletter 2017
    North Wales Branch Newsletter 2017 2017 Contents Page 3 A Message from our Chairman Page 4 25 Years of Daily Moth Records Page 5 Glanville Fritillary Page 8 Adventures in North Wales Page 9 Home-made Moth Trap Page 10 Welsh Garden Moth Scheme Page 12 Branch Communication Page 13 Events Listings (Optional centre-spread pull-out) Page 16 AGM and Members’ Day Information Page 17 Finance Statement Page 18 Butterflies of Mynydd Marian Page 20 Eyarth Rocks Reserve Page 21 Cistus Forester Page 22 Why not make your nature walk count? Page 24 Studying the moths of bird nests Page 25 It’s an ill wind Page 27 Butterfly and Moth Recorders Page 28 Contacts Cover photos (Mark Sheridan) Top - The Mint Moth (Pyrausta aurata) Middle – Gatekeeper (Pyronia tithonus) Bottom – Merveille du Jour (Griposia aprilina) This newsletter is published by the North Wales Branch of Butterfly Conservation. Please note that the opinions expressed in this newsletter are not necessarily those of the Society or the Branch Registered Charity No.254937 2 2017 A Message from our Chairman Firstly, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Julie Horner, who has recently stepped down as our Newsletter Editor, for the time, effort and dedication she has devoted towards this task for the last six years. This has been a substantial undertaking on Julie’s part and we are extremely grateful for the contribution she has made towards the success of North Wales Branch. As many of you know, Julie is an accomplished artist and a selection of her beautiful butterfly paintings can be seen (and purchased!) from the display of her work at Pensychnant.
    [Show full text]
  • Butterfly Report 2019 Hengistbury Head
    Hengistbury Head Butterfly Census Annual Report 2019 Written by Venetia Powell There are around 59 species of butterfly present in the UK according to the UK Butterfly Monitoring Scheme (UKBMS); 25 of these species have been recorded around Hengistbury Head. The number of species in the UK are monitored in order to be able to assess and keep track of the change in climate. UKBMS are able to monitor climate change using the populations of butterfly and by looking at the living conditions of specified areas (habitats) and whether the populations increase or decline. For example, butterflies do not cope well in cold temperatures and therefore thrive more in warmth; they are more likely to seek shelter in colder climates to be able to restore their optimum body temperatures. This is because butterflies are cold blooded, meaning that they are unable to produce their own heat and therefore, would lack the energy they need to be able to fly. To be able to generate energy, they absorb heat from the sun hence why they cope better in warmer climates. Butterflies are important to the environment as they pollinate plants, the nectar providing them with energy. Method: For the past 41 years, Hengistbury Head have conducted a weekly butterfly transect walks during the breeding season. This transect consists of pathways dissecting various habitats. Data is recorded between the weeks of 1st April and 30th September due to the butterflies being more frequent during warmer temperatures; they tend to go into hiding and try to find shelter to keep warm in cooler conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team
    Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Biological Control September 12-16, 2005 Mark S. Hoddle, Compiler University of California, Riverside U.S.A. Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team—Morgantown, West Virginia United States Forest FHTET-2005-08 Department of Service September 2005 Agriculture Volume I Papers were submitted in an electronic format, and were edited to achieve a uniform format and typeface. Each contributor is responsible for the accuracy and content of his or her own paper. Statements of the contributors from outside of the U.S. Department of Agriculture may not necessarily reflect the policy of the Department. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable. Any references to pesticides appearing in these papers does not constitute endorsement or recommendation of them by the conference sponsors, nor does it imply that uses discussed have been registered. Use of most pesticides is regulated by state and federal laws. Applicable regulations must be obtained from the appropriate regulatory agency prior to their use. CAUTION: Pesticides can be injurious to humans, domestic animals, desirable plants, and fish and other wildlife if they are not handled and applied properly. Use all pesticides selectively and carefully. Follow recommended practices given on the label for use and disposal of pesticides and pesticide containers. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status.
    [Show full text]