No. 4 May 1998
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p. 11
AN UNUSUAL WATER BUG FROM THE RIVER TEME: APHELOCHEIRUS AESTIVALIS (F).
By Don Goddard
On 28th March 1997 we had a family picnic by the River Teme at Ham Bridge between Martley and Clifton-on-Teme. This venue was chosen so that I could collect mayfly nymphs for the forthcoming mayfly identification course in April. The usual kick sampling in the shallows produced a good crop of mayfly nymphs as well as caseless caddis, water beetles, water shrimps etc. I decided to try in deeper water and very carefully kick sampled at a maximum water depth of approximately 0.75 m. This yielded further mayfly nymphs, small fish, and several specimens of a bug I knew only from illustrations, and a wader full of water!
I recognized the bug as Aphelocheirus aestivalis, the only UK representative of the family APHELOCHEIRIDAE. It is about 10 mm long and 8 mm wide and dark olive green with pale legs when alive. British specimens are micropterous (very short wings) although fully winged forms (macropterous) occur abroad. According to Southwood & Weston (1959) the distribution is based on the ancient river systems such as Trent, Severn, and Thames, and is widely distributed in Wales, the Midlands and the south. They quote Worcestershire as a locality where there are no records held by the Worcestershire Biological Records Centre. (Note: there was no Worcestershire BRC in 1959! Ed.)
The bug is found in medium-fast rivers with strong gravelly bottoms over silt and it seems to prefer hard water with little organic matter or vegetation. It is unusual in that it never surfaces and walks or swims rapidly along the river bed hunting for prey. It is a strict carnivore and its long rostrum can inflict a painful bite (take care when handling it – I didn’t!). It breathes via a plastron system, the insect is covered with microscopic water repellent hairs at about 2,000,000 per square mm which trap a thin film of air next to the body. This film is self-renewing with oxygen diffusing in and carbon dioxide out. The bug can descent to a depth of at least 5 m and the abdomen bears pressure receptor organs to presumably regulate depth.
Despite diligent search I could not find this bug in water shallower than thigh-depth which, coupled with its habit of not surfacing, may mean that it is under-recorded. However we do not have many rivers like the Teme so it is probably restricted to suitable stretches of such rivers. I have kick sampled at similar depths in the River Severn above Bewdley but never found it.
The only bugs one might possibly mistake for Aphelocheiros are immature specimens of the saucer bug Ilyocoris cimicoides (L), but this species does not have the long rostrum, has a much wider head, much stouter front legs, and being a mainly pond and canal bug is never likely to occur in the same habitat (Savage 1989).
If you do search for Aphelocheiros take care! It is a deep water bug of fast rivers and ideally should not be searched for alone!
References:
| Southwood TRE & Weston D (1959) Land & Water Bugs of the British Isles. Warne. London. | |
| Savage AA (1989) Adults of the British Aquatic Hemiptera Heteroptera. Fresh Water Biological Association Scientific Publication No. 50. |
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p. 7
FLIES AND MICROMOTHS – OLD BIRDS' NESTS WANTED
David M. Green
Nesting material provides a home for a range of insect larvae that feed off protein debris discarded by, or off, the birds above. Later in the year, when certain the nest is disused, please collect nests in polythene bags and send to me (or via WBRC) – so that later flies and micromoths, anything, that has pupated among nest materials, is trapped and visible when it tries to fly away and can be tubed. Ideally the nest(s) should not be sealed in a bag when wet because the amount of water will cause mould and deterioration of atmosphere. Please label spacious transparent bag with map ref and address, and bird if known. If you look after nestboxes you could stuff all your old nests in a large bag together when you clear the boxes. Possibly there might be beetles, some very small, which I would also like to have preferably tubed. We have bags available. Keep nest away from body to avoid harmless fleas. Bat-dung is a source of rare fly species of Fanniidae – if you want to collect some old dung later in year.
I am especially looking for species in families Anthomyiidae, because any species likely new to Worcestershire records, at least the 10k square, possibly to Britain, and in Fanniidae. These two families were previously subfamilies of Muscidae, of which common house fly Musca domestica is a member, and the flies are more or less similar in shape and structure, maybe with narrower abdomens, generally around 4-6mm long, generally black in general appearance or dusted pale. A wide range of bristles on the thorax, legs, and hairs on antennal arista are widely taxonomically important in this section (calyptrata) of flies that includes Muscidae, Fannidae, Anthomyiidae, Calliphoridae the blowflies, Sarcophagidae the flesh flies, etc). Genera are primary defined by genital form (which now also feature prominently in identification to species with Anthomyiids). Keys to anthomyiids using bristles are still in development because the variation in bristles within species, bristles being a external major feature used in these keys, especially historically, causes difficulty, and led to general genera confusion before genitalia were used more positively. I have some test keys by Michael Ackland (c.1987) to many species that seem to be working out well, and the male genitalia are very distinctive. If you like looking at genitalia this is a group for you to study.
Very Rare Black And White Anthomyiid At Alfrick In 1941
The Natural History Museum has a single anthomyiid specimen, the only one in Britain that is presently identified as Anthomyia bazini Seguy, 1929, according to information I have (ACKLAND 1997) as I understand it. With this specimen is data: WORCS: Alfrick, 5.vii.1941, C.J.Wainwright. This species is originally described by Seguy from single male caught near Paris, and appears to be found recently in more distant Europe, but appears rare more locally, like not found. The range of food of the larvae of the genus Anthomyia is not established. Birds nests could reveal more information because KEILIN (1924) says they are the larval situation for another species very like A. bazini, but there have been contrary observations as musk thistle being a food plant for this species A. procellaris. Perhaps bird boxes at the Knapp and Papermill could reveal more facts or another specimen of P. bazini. Anthomyia are black and white patterned species.
I look forward to receiving your nesting material later in the year.
Bibliography
Handbooks for the identification of British insects. Royal Entomological Society:
| FONSECA, E C M dA (1968)Muscidae. Handbooks … 10(4b)(includes Fannidae key) | |
| OLDROYD, H (1970)Diptera; Introduction and key to families.Handbooks …9(1)(3rd edition) |
Other – non RES:
| ACKLAND, D M (c.1997) Unpublished collection of keys (some based on work of Fonsecca and others) and many drawings of male genitalia of anthomyiids by DMA. | |
| ACKLAND, D M (1997) Anthomyiid Newsletter Febuary 1997. Dipterists Forum. | |
| COLYER, N C and HAMMOND, C O (1968) Flies of the British Isles. Wayside and Woodland series. Frederick Warne and Co. Ltd. (2nd ed) | |
| KEILIN, D (1924) On the life history of Anthomyia procellaris Rond. and A.pluvialis L. inhabiting the nests of birds. Parasitology, 16(2):150-159. | |
| UNWIN, D M (1981) A key to the families of British Diptera. AIDGAP key. Field studies 5: 513-553 |
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p.5
NEW SNAIL TO WORCESTERSHIRE – HYGROMIA CINCTELLA
By David M Green
Searching for snails after dark, 29th August 1996, with a torch in the garden at Little Comberton near Pershore, Worcestershire (SO 964432) I found a distinctive snail, marked with a pale line around the outer rim of the shell, with a rather conical shape above, crawling on quarry tiles next to a shed. The snail was Hygromia cinctella (no common name) never before recorded in Worcestershire.
Hygromia cinctella has a Mediterranean range. Distribution is SE France, extending up Rhone valley into Switzerland (Geneva basin); also near the Atlantic in SW France; and is well established as an introduction in SW England (S Devon) (Kerney 1979). Contacts in the Conchological Society, say Hygromia cinctella has been spreading over southern England recently. In a Surrey garden, it is very common (Light 1998), and is also progressing northwards. Within last two years it was found in a Cheltenham garden, but the garden in Little Comberton is presently the most northerly record according to Michael Kerney (February 1998) the national non-marine conchological recorder at the British Museum (Natural History). Possibly the warmer climate is enabling the population spread; a long cold winter could widely kill the snail, reducing the population back to refugia on the southern coast. When H. cinctellaarrives at a new site from distant population it was possibly carried with plant cuttings or soil, as baby snails or eggs. The spread across S England was probably a combination of this inadvertent man transportation and the snails own natural spread.
During February and March 1998 four adults and one juvenile snail were found in the same garden suggesting that the garden was colonised. The Worcestershire Wildlife Trust and Worcestershire Biological Records Centre would be interested to discover the how far Hygromia cinctella has spread especially in this part of the country, further north and Wales. Local BBC TV and radio, and some Worcestershire newspapers, and WWT newsletter have featured the snail, resulting in a few presently unconfirmed reports that Hygromia cinctella has been seen – this information needs to be checked preferably by us visiting the sites and seeing a captured snail or or finding one. We hope to hear from anyone who believes they have identified (or requires advice on) the snail in Worcestershire and surrounding counties and further north. Please capture a snail and inform WBRC.
Where to find Hygromia cinctella
Hygromia cinctella is a smallish, not outstanding but rather distinctive snail, described below, that might be inhabiting your garden or waste ground. It could be out crawling after dark, especially in warmer, humid or wet weather – look on flagstones, paths, near sheds. Or daytime, under stones, materials resting against grass, or nettles, ivy, etc., or revealed when clearing gardens. If you can find one, a captured snail would enable us to come and check the identification so it can be recorded unambiguously.
Description of Hygromia cinctella
Shell brown to very pale brown, except usually for a single thin pale (often pale yellow) band around the outer rim of the shell. The outer whorl often appears generally darker owing to blackish splodges. A careful look from different angles reveals (a hand lens is useful) that the outer rim is also strongly keeled (the rim is a pale outward ridge, not a more rounded shape like other snails in the garden). Size much smaller than the garden snail and hedge snails. Shell widest width about 10-12mm adult, but you might find a smaller juvenile. Shell height 7mm. Despite being smallish, Hygromia cinctella is quite distinctive with the rounded pyramidal shape above, the somewhat flattened whorl below the rim, and lighter coloured keel at the rim. Mouth viewed-head on is oval as a general shape, not round. Underneath, the umbilicus (hole in center) is minute, partly covered by lip. The big pair of antennae are particularly long when fully extended.
Habitat
Gardens, waste ground.
Acknowledgements:
John W. Meiklejohn & Paul F. Whitehead for confirmation of my identification.
References and Bibliography:
| Kerney MP, Cameron RAD, Riley G (1979) (1st pub) A Field Guide to the Land Snails of Britain & N.W. Europe. Collins (very useful descriptions & colour illustrations). | |
| Kerney, Michael (Feb 1998) (non-marine recorder, Conchological Society, British Museum (NH)) pers.com. | |
| Janus, H (1965) The Young Specialist Looks at Land and Freshwater Molluscs. Burke, London (descriptions etc) | |
| Light, Janice (1997-8) Nature Line. No.108. Winter 97-8. Surrey Wildlife Trust | |
| Light, Janice (1998) (marine recorder & Surrey recorder, Conchological Soc.) pers.com. | |
| McMillan, Nora F (1968) British Shells. Wayside & Woodland series. Frederick Warne & Co. (reprint 1973) | |
| Pfleger, V & Chatfield J (1988) A Guide to Snails of Britain & Europe. Hamlyn (includes a key) |
Post-publication additions
Bibliography
- Dagmar Říhová & Lucie Juřičková. 2011. The Girdled Snail Hygromia cinctella (Draparnaud, 1801) new to the Czech Republic. Malacologica Bohemoslovaca (2011), 10: 35–37 ISSN 1336-6939. http://mollusca.sav.sk/pdf/10/10.Rihova.pdf (date 2012-03-16)
- List of non-marine molluscs of Great Britain. Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_non-marine_molluscs_of_Great_Britain (date 2012-03-16)
- Hygromia cinctella. Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygromia cinctella (date 2012-03-16)
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p.3
HUNT THE LAND CADDIS
By G H Green
In the April 1997 issue of Worcestershire Record I drew attention to the “Worcestershire Land Caddis situation” according to the information I had at the time. Since then land caddis have been found at several Wyre Forest sites by Mike Taylor of English Nature and at Horsehill Wood near Ribbesford by Nicola Flemwell and myself. Furthermore, as we go to Press, Will Watson has confirmed their presence in Nunnery Wood and has found them in Perry Wood, Wardon Wood and Tolladine Wood, all near Worcester.
Also, somewhat to my embarrassment, I have been reminded that Dr David Harding from University of Wolverhampton has studied Land Caddis for many years. I have now spoken and corresponded with him and, although he has recently retired, he is still very interested in land caddis. Indeed he appealed for information on their distribution in the magazine Antenna in 1995 and had no response.
Following our discussions we would like you to all go out and look for land caddis as soon as possible! It is high time we knew where this strange insect lives in Worcestershire and across the borders into Herefordshire, Shropshire and Staffordshire. As it is such a rare insect in Britain it should figure in any relevant Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), and the first of these are now being prepared for a county consortium by Bronwen Bruce based at the Worcestershire Wildlife Trust. To prepare a useful BAP we need to more information on their distribution.
When you receive this it will be a bit late in the year for finding large active land caddis larvae although empty cases can still be found so its still worth looking.
To help you in your search a slightly modified reprint of David Harding’s article from Antenna follows this note.
What to do with your records
Please send them to the Worcestershire BRC.. If you find empty cases we should pleased to see them. I am liaising closely with David Harding and we shall eventually combine all the data.
Please record:
| Name of site | |
| Grid reference | |
| Approximate numbers found | |
| Description of leaf litter – please identify the leaves! | |
| Type of woodland | |
| Date | |
| Observer |
Land caddis larvae look like familiar case-bearing aquatic caddis but beware case bearing moth caterpillars.
References:
| Green, GH (1997) Terrestrial (Land) Caddis. Worcestershire Record 1,2, 8. | |
| Harding, DJL (1995) Land register for Land Caddis? Antenna 19,1, 18-20. (see also Land Register For Land Caddis) |
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p. 14
NIGHTINGALES 1998
By G H Green
As readers may know the BTO launched a National Nightingale Appeal in May 1998 to raise funds for a repeat national nightingale survey in 1999, and to investigate the bird’s habitat requirements. The reason for this intensive study is that the two BTO Atlases of breeding birds around 1970 and 1990 showed a decline of about 30% of the bird’s range, and local information since that time suggests there has been a continuing decline. The last full national survey was done in 1980.
To prepare for the 1999 survey and to help with the Appeal, joint BTO/Worcestershire Wildlife Trust Press Releases asked for information this year. These were taken up by the local Press and Local Radio and we have received an interesting response to this and to a request in Worcestershire Wildlife News.
By early June I have received about 30 reports of individual singing nightingales which is perhaps better than expected. All these records are from the south of the county – Broadway area, Strensham, Drakes Broughton area, Malvern area. The only northerly record so far is of a bird singing behind a factory in Redditch.
If any reader heard Nightingales in Worcestershire in 1998 and haven’t mentioned it to me yet, please give me a ring – don’t assume I have bound to have been told! Also you may have heard more birds at a particular site than other observers.
The main fund-raiser for the BTO Appeal is a Nightingale CD containing a fascinating collection of old and new recordings – the first recording ever made, nightingale singing with cellist, nightingales with bombers flying overhead, and brilliant modern recordings. If you would like a CD I should be very pleased to sell you one for £10.
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p. 12
THE BROWN ANT: LASIUS BRUNNEUS (LATREILLE)
By Harry Green
Alexander & Taylor (1998) have drawn attention to the fact that this ant is more widespread in the Severn Vale than previously known. As far as Worcestershire is concerned this is an ant we need to look for.
The Brown Ant, then called Acanthomyops brunneus, was first found by Dr N H Joy (of beetle fame) in Britain at Theale in Berkshire on 21st January 1923 (Donisthorpe 1927). On 20th June 1923 Joy and Donisthorpe visited the area and found another colony and later both observers and others found them in Windsor Park. Subsequently the Thames Valley was found to be a stronghold for the species and it was not until the 1960s that it was reported from the Severn Vale in Gloucestershire and south Worcestershire. Alexander & Taylor (1998) now report the ant from many 10x10km squares in the Severn Valley in Gloucestershire, together with two new records from Worcestershire at Croome Park in 1996 and Hanbury Park in 1984, and a record from Shropshire. It seems likely that the species has been under-recorded rather than showing a recent extension of range.
The Brown Ant lives in trees inhabiting extensive areas in either roots, trunk or high branches, and it can be found in holes, hollow parts and under bark. It is found in old oaks, old hawthorns, and many other species. Alexander & Taylor (1998) report that old orchards are used with many of the trees containing colonies. The suitability of tree a for nests is probably more important than the tree species.
A long list of other invertebrates have been reported from Brown Ants’ nests, especially beetles, and another ant Leptothorax nylanderi, also an under-recorded tree-dwelling species, may have some sort of association with Lasius brunneus.
So…….when grubbing about inside old rotten trees or under bark for invertebrates look for ants. Identification may prove difficult but the Naturalists’ Handbook by Skinner & Allen (1996) contains helpful keys. Also the Royal Entomological Society key by Bolton & Collingwood (1975) is now available new. The Collins New Naturalist volumes by Morley (1953) and Brian (1977) are helpful, and its always worth reading Donisthorpe’s (1927) magnum opus if you can get hold of a copy!
References:
| Alexander KNA & Taylor A (1998) The Severn Vale, a national stronghold for Lasius brunneus (Latreille) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Brit J Ent Nat Hist 10:217-219. | |
| Bolton B & Collingwood CA (1975) Hymenoptera, Formicidae. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects Vol VI part 3(c). | |
| Royal Entomological Society of London. | |
| Brian, MV (1977) Ants. New Naturalist Series. Collins. | |
| Donisthorpe HStJK (1927) British Ants, their life-history and classification. Routledge. London. | |
| Morley, D Wragge (1953) Ants. Collins. London. New Naturalist special volume. | |
| Skinner GJ & Allen GW (1996) Ants. Naturalists’ Handbook 24. Richmond Publishing Company. Slough. |
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p. 14
Wintering Blackcaps
By Harry Green
Lack (1986), in the BTO Atlas of Wintering Birds, states that between 1945 and 1954 an average of 22 records (for all Britain and Ireland) of wintering blackcaps appeared in county bird reports. Between 1970 and 1997 this had risen to 380 and a special BTO enquiry 1978-79 recorded at least 1,714 birds.
In his summary of reports of blackcaps wintering in England and Wales Leach (1981) gave the following figures for blackcaps reported from Worcestershire:
1945-1954 2 1970-1977 21 1969-1970 6 1978-1979 39
The Winter Atlas for the period 1980-84 showed wintering blackcaps to be widespread, extending throughout Britain and Ireland. At that time blackcaps appeared to be more frequent in cities, towns and villages than in the countryside. This may have been to lack of observers collecting records although cold spells did appear to drive birds towards gardens.
Since then the number of wintering blackcaps has undoubtedly increased and they have become familiar birds in gardens, often visiting feeding stations or foraging for insects round compost heaps or taking mistletoe berries – blackcaps appear to be omnivorous!
Reference:
| Lack, P (1986) The Atlas of Wintering Birds in Britain and Ireland. Poyser. | |
| Leach, I H (1981) Wintering blackcaps in Britain and Ireland. Bird Study 28(1):5-14. |
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p. 12
THE RETURN OF THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN?
By Richard Harbird, West Midland Bird Club recorder for Worcestershire.
Not all natural history stories are depressing tales of vanishing habitat and declining species. Just occasionally nature fights back, often with our help (accidental or deliberate). This is a story of seven species of bird, yes seven magnificent species, once seemingly lost to Worcestershire which have either bounced back or are showing signs that they might reappear as breeding species.
The Yul Brynner and Steve McQueen of our story, the two most likely to succeed, had their populations decimated by the gun-toting Victorians. I refer to the Raven and the Buzzard.
Ravens bred in much of the County before the dawn of the nineteenth century, but were becoming scarce by the 1840’s and 1850’s when they still bred near Stanford-on-Teme, Upton-on-Severn, and Bewdley. There followed almost a century without a single known breeding record, indeed Harthan commented in his Birds of Worcestershire that they would probably never breed again in Worcestershire because of the lack of carrion. Never say never! After a few isolated breeding records at western sites from 1949 onwards, a real resurgence has taken place in the last 15 years or so. As recently as 1985 there were as few as three published records a year, but since then there has been a steady increase both in the number of birds reported and the number of confirmed breeding records. The recent article by Brett Westwood in Worcestershire Wildlife News (April 1996) gave some interesting insights into the reasons for the change, and graphically illustrates the extent of the comeback. Suffice it to say that during 1996 alone Ravens were reported from over 100 localities, largely in the west and north, and including at least six instances of confirmed breeding. Ravens being prone to wander, the breeding population will certainly be a lot closer to six than to 100, but there is no sign of any slow down in the spread.
The Buzzard suffered a similar fate to the Raven during the nineteenth century. It was not until the Second World War that there was a small improvement in the situation, as gamekeepers were called away to shoot Germans instead of the local Buzzard population. In the mid 1950’s a survey of likely Buzzard terrain such as the Teme Valley produced evidence of 13 confirmed breeding pairs, and a further 7 to 11 probably breeding. Alas, disaster was just around the corner.The myxomatosis outbreak in 1955-56 decimated the county’s rabbit population, and the ready use by farmers of organochlorine pesticides in the same period also contributed to a serious decline which left no more than four breeding pairs in the county by 1958. The ban on organochlorine sheep dips in 1966 saw the population at least stabilise, and by 1986 at least six or seven pairs were present, and not all of them in the Teme Valley. During the last 10 years, however, the numbers have rocketed. So much so, that the Buzzard was chosen as the subject of a county-wide survey during 1997 and 1998 to try to establish just how many pairs there were. The preliminary results from the first year of fieldwork suggest a population of between 36 and 82 pairs, a figure which should increase further after the 1998 season’s results are in. A full report will be produced in due course, but there can be no doubt that the Buzzard is truly the come-back kid.
The remainder of our story concerns the possible future rather than the present. Five species which formerly bred in the county which have not yet returned, but could conceivably do so. The signs are there.
The first is the Red Kite. Yes, this was once a Worcestershire bird, but you have to go back a very long way. We are talking 17th and 18th century rather than 19th, although Harthan records that the species nested at Alfrick as late as 1840, and that birds were occasionally seen over the Malverns until about 1850. Those good old Victorians did their best to rid the country of the species and the last remaining birds gravitated famously to mid Wales. The species was protected there, an early success story for the new conservation movements of the 20th century and by the 1980’s the population was very healthy. But it wasn’t really spreading. The reason for the sudden optimism about the possible return of the Red Kite is the bold step by English Nature and others to reintroduce the Kite to central southern England and northern Scotland. The species is now reported annually in the county, many of the birds showing wing-tags which betray their origin to the reintroduction schemes. If we do get the Kites back, the first breeding records will necessarily be cloaked in secrecy because regrettably the Victorian pastime of egg-collecting persists among a few misguided souls. But perhaps one day the Kite will follow the trend set by the Buzzard and the Raven and become a familiar sight over the woods of Worcestershire.
The next most promising bird’s last breeding season record was on the Lickey Hills in 1965, apart from a single bird at Leigh Sinton in late July and early August 1972. After that there seemed no way back for the Wood Lark. The species was declining nationally and was thought only to migrate short distances. The exact reason for the decline is difficult to understand. Climate change and the decline of rabbit cropped swards following the onset of myxomatosis have been suggested. By 1991 the species bred no closer than Nottinghamshire. Then, unexpectedly, things began to change. The Wood Lark populations in Breckland and other strongholds began to increase. They started breeding in Derbyshire, and from 1994 in south Staffordshire. Ironically, the habitat being preferred by these pioneers is a rather man-made one consisting of clear-fell areas in commercial forestry plantations. Hints that Worcestershire could be recolonised come particularly from one or two winter sightings of birds in the Kinver area close to the Worcestershire border. It may therefore pay would-be Wood Lark finders to check out not only some of their former sites like Hartlebury Common, and Devil’s Spittleful where the species occupied Worcestershire’s declining heathland habitat, but also forestry areas such as the Wyre Forest and Kingsford Country Park.
Talking of forestry, another potential returnee could also put in an appearance there. The Nightjar was formerly tolerably widespread in Worcestershire as elsewhere in the Midlands, with areas such as the Lickey Hills, Shrawley Woods, and Trench Wood holding them in the nineteenth century, and pairs in the Lenches and the Worcestershire part of Kinver Edge until relatively recently. The decline was a national one, with the contraction in range being blamed on a variety of factors such as loss of habitat, and increased human disturbance. Whatever the reason, numbers seemed to reach rock bottom in the early 1980s. But since then there have been signs of improvement. A national survey in 1992 showed a 50% improvement on the numbers found in 1981. The bulk of the increase was taking place in East Anglia, the south-west of England, and North Wales. In the Midlands, numbers were similar to 1981 levels on Cannock Chase in Staffordshire, the last remaining West Midland site. In 1997 however, survey work on Cannock Chase suggested a 20% increase there since 1992. With three casual records in Worcestershire in each of the last three years, perhaps we are in line for re-colonisation. The most likely sites are commercial forestry areas like the Wyre Forest, and Kingsford Country Park. Analysis of the Cannock Chase results suggests that much can be achieved by a sympathetic forestry regime which leaves plenty of open areas for Nightjars to exploit.
My last two suggestions are perhaps the species least likely to sustain any potential re-colonisation. The Dartford Warbler’s claim to be a former Worcestershire resident is somewhat tenuous to say the least. Harthan could find no definite records, but it was reputed to have occurred near Broadway and Tenbury Wells in the early part of the nineteenth century. Certainly, the species was more widely distributed in the Midlands during the last century, with breeding records from Cannock Chase, and casual sightings elsewhere. Nationally the decline has mirrored the disappearance of it’s favoured lowland heath habitat. Being a partially migratory Mediterranean species, cold winters such as those in 1947 and 1962-3 have decimated the population in the past. Enter global warming, or perhaps simply the lucky fluke of a consistent run of very mild winters for over a decade. The result has been an enormous increase in Dartford Warbler numbers on the heaths of southern England. With no room at home, young birds have been forced to disperse widely in the hope of finding new habitat. In Worcestershire this has resulted in the discovery of a single wintering bird on the Lickeys in 1995, and on Castlemorton Common in March 1997. Two problems remain. Do we have the habitat, and will the climate remain mild enough to allow sufficient young birds to survive the winter. In the first instance the answer could be yes. Very little lowland heath remains, but Castlemorton Common, Hartlebury Common, and several similar areas still survive in the county. What a coup it would be if the species did recolonise. The climate of course is the fly in the ointment. It could only take one really bad winter to blow away all thoughts of a return. We can only wait and hope.
Our final species is surely a long shot. The Corncrake was once a common bird throughout the Midlands, and Worcestershire was no exception. But the gradual intensification of agriculture towards the end of the last century began to threaten the species. Since 1900 the accelerated introduction of effective pesticides has seen a reduction in the food supply (which has affected many species) coupled with a change in farming techniques which has robbed the Corncrake in particular of a safe environment in which to breed. Eventually banished mainly to offshore Scottish islands, the species survival as a British species seemed in threat. Recently however,an RSPB led initiative to pay crofters to farm in a way which is sympathetic to Corncrakes has arrested the decline, and the species is even increasing in some places. True, there is little real evidence of any range expansion, but being a migratory species, the potential exists for birds to stop almost anywhere. Isolated breeding attempts could occur in any county, so why not Worcestershire? In 1997 there were reports of calling Corncrakes in both Warwickshire and Worcestershire, so who knows what the future may hold. Maybe set-aside could provide the answer. Certainly the Corncrake’s future is inextricably linked to the agricultural practices pursued by farmers, and these are themselves dictated by the policies of central government and the EU. Watch this space for future developments.
References:
| Harbird R E & Gribble F C (1998) Nightjars and other Breeding Birds of Cannock Chase. in prep. | |
| Harrison G et al (1982) The Birds of the West Midlands. | |
| Harthan A J (1947) The Birds of Worcestershire | |
| Westwood B (1996) The Return of the Raven. Worcestershire Wildlife News April 1996 no 75, p16 |
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p.4
LAND REGISTER FOR A CADDIS LARVA
– modified reprint from Antenna January 1995, Vol 19,1, 18-20.
By David J L Harding
The genus Enoicyla is unique among European Trichoptera in having flightless females and terrestrial immature stages. Three species are known in continental Europe (Fischer, 1973) of which only one, E. pusilla Burmeister, occurs in Britain, where it is commonly referred to as the terrestrial or land caddis.
After the first British records of larvae of E.pusilla, found by Mr. Fletcher of Worcester in moss near the roots of willow trees, observers were asked to keep a look-out for this peculiar insect (McLachlan, 1868). Despite the diligence with which Victorian entomologists doubtless scoured their local woodlands, the only reports during the next decade seem to have been by McLachlan and Fletcher, still in Worcestershire. However, these were from woodland, rather than from the margins of rivulets, and therefore more comparable to continental records. According to Hickin (1965, 1967) it was not discovered again until April 1957, when he was camping in a meadow on the Worcestershire edge of Wyre Forest, near Bewdley. Ironically, after many years of fruitless searching in Wyre, Norman Hickin was pipped at the post by his daughter Sari, who first spotted the larvae on her tent. Thereafter, the species was claimed to be restricted to a small area around Wyre Forest railway station (Hickin, 1971).
During the 1970s I learned of other sites, including Chaddesley Woods NNR, (between Kidderminster and Bromsgrove), Shrawley Woods, (dominated by small-leaved lime, south of Stourport), West Malvern and various sites in Herefordshire, including Bromyard Downs. My most north-westerly find so far has been from just to the east of the Clee Hills, and in 1991 I found my first Staffordshire colony, albeit a few hundred yards from the Shropshire boundary, near Enville. On the basis of these records I was quoted by Wallace (1991) as stating that E. pusilla is confined in Britain to an area which I refer to as ‘Greater Wyre Forest’ (i.e. within a 10-mile radius of Bewdley). Consequently this species is categorised as rare (Red Data Book Category 3) by Wallace (1991), being ‘common within its restricted range’.
I am now appealing to readers (and their families) to help fill in gaps within this area of the West Midlands and, optimistically, to extend its recorded distribution to other parts of Britain. To assist this quest, I will summarize the life cycle and relevant aspects of behaviour, before suggesting were and when larvae are most likely to be found.
Phenology of E. pusilla
Adults only live for a few days. Winged males are occasionally seen at the end of September or the beginning of October. Each female lays about 50 eggs, typically amongst moss at the base of a tree. These hatch after about a month, so that at Shrawley first instar larvae are first found at the beginning of November. Morphologically, the larva is a typical limnephilid, with the exception of gills, which are absent, and of the lateral protuberances on the first abdominal segment, which are less well developed than in aquatic species. After hatching, the young larvae construct conical cases, mainly from organic matter, and begin to feed on mosses, algae and tree-leaf litter. By the New Year, most have undergone their first moult, having incorporated sand grains into the anterior rim of the slightly curved case (see illustration). Larvae can be separated into five instars, based on head widths, although there is some overlap between instars IV and V. Population densities can exceed 15OO per square metre in December, but may be less than 10 per square metre by July. Peaks for successive instars occur at roughly monthly intervals between December and April. Average case lengths range from 1.8mm in November to 8.2mm in June, with a maximum value of 10mm
As the season progresses, some of the larvae disperse away from the bases of trees. Under moist conditions larvae of any instar can be seen moving around, like Allbran, feeding among the surface layers of the forest floor or on mosses and algae on tree trunks at heights of up to about a metre. Sometimes they hang from twigs and other vegetation, apparently drying out after being soaked by rain or dew. During January 1993 there was a mass migration of larvae onto bramble bushes, and the invasion of the Hickins’ tent may have a similar explanation.
Kelner-Pillault (1960) observed comparable behaviour after heavy rain; as the relative humidity fell below 70%, so larvae descended into the litter again. We have shown that larvae can survive for several days in the laboratory at humidities down to 60%, and that they appear to be much happier in cultures of dry litter than e.g. oribatid mites. In the field, if the weather is particularly cold or dry, larvae retreat deeper into the forest floor.
As the numbers of living larvae decline during the summer, so the abundance of empty cases increases, perhaps due to predation. In June, larvae retire into the forest floor and seal off the posterior opening of the case with a silken operculum. They can still move around, but they do not feed. In August they seek a more permanent shelter in soil or in humus-filled tree holes. Here they pupate, having first sealed the anterior opening.
Feeding habits and habitats
E. pusilla is a typical detritivore, feeding predominantly on fungus-conditioned tree leaves (Packham et al., 1992). In culture, larvae will accept broadleaves, conifer needles, bracken and bramble leaves, as well as mosses and algae, but not grasses. Although larvae may be found in grass tussocks, they must have access to tree leaves, so that this species is restricted to woodland. They have been found in coniferous sites, including larch and Scots pine, but I associate them typically with oak or lime woodlands on well drained, slightly acid soils. Case composition varies with habitat in terms of the relative proportions of tree litter and sand grains.
Advice on sampling
Once you have got your eye in (and your knees in damp litter) you can spot even the smallest larvae (ca. 2mm) at the bases of trees. Sieving of litter into a white tray may help at this stage. Later, larger instars are easier to see, but are less abundant. The ideal conditions are sunshine after overnight rain any time between February and April, when larvae should be active on the litter surface and even on tree trunks. During the spring and summer, family outings could utilize the keen eyesight and treasure-hunt instincts of children. Don’t forget that old cases can be found at any time.
Acknowledgements
Among numerous helpers in the tracking down of E. pusilla, I would particularly like to thank Noel King, Malcolm Clark, Mike Shotton, Basil Miles, Ian Wallace, the late Norman Hickin, Pam Copson and Cezary Tomaszewski, as well as various project students.
References:
| Fischer, FC. (1973). Trichopterum Catalogus, 15: 206-219. Nederlandse entomologische. Vereniging, Amsterdam. | |
| Hickin, NE (1965). Forest Refreshed. Hutchinson. | |
| Hickin, NE (1967). Caddis Larvae. Hutchinson. | |
| Hickin, NE (1971). The Natural History of an English Forest: the Wild Life of Wyre. Hutchinson. | |
| Kelner-Pillault, S (1960). Biologie, écologie d’Enoicyla pusilla Burm. (Trichoptères Limnophilides). L’année biologique 36: 51-99. | |
| McLachlan, R (1868). Occurrence in England of the larva of a terrestrial Trichopterous insect; probably Enoicyla pusilla Burmeister. Ent. Mon. Mag. 5:43-44. | |
| Packham, JR, Harding, DJL, Hilton, GM & Stuttard, RA (1992). Functional Ecology of Woodland and Forests. Chapman and Hall. | |
| Wallace, ID (1991). A review of the Trichoptera of Great Britain. Nature Conservancy Council. |
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p. 8
INSECT PHOTOGRAPHY: AN ADDED ENJOYMENT TO YOUR RECORDING WITH REAL SCIENTIFIC VALUE!
By Kevin McGee
Yes, it can be fun and very rewarding, and need not be as difficult as you may imagine!
You may have seen people like myself wandering around local reserves weighed-down by several tons of equipment that all seems very complicated and expensive. Well OK, this really can become the case if you get hooked on combining two “hobbies”, although with me its not so much a “hobby” as a way of life!. For me, it began about twenty years ago by developing my interest in Lepidoptera with a new-found fascination for photography, whilst I was an art student. I quickly obtained some basic equipment and set about photographing as many of the Lepidoptera and Odonata of Warwickshire as possible. It’s at this time when you become much more aware of the behavioural patterns of each species as you try to get close enough (or not!) to take their portraits.
This is also about the time when you realise what sort of equipment best suits photography of our larger insects eg butterflies. By far the best combination is a good sturdy SLR (single lens reflex) camera with a 100 mm macro lens. This is a specialist lens which has just enough of a telephoto magnification to allow that little extra distance between yourself and the subject, very important with nervous species! This can be very expensive depending on the quality of the lens manufacturer, but bargains can be found in the used lens lists from reputable dealers and these can cost half the price of a new one and be in near mint condition. By the way – autofocus really does work!
Ideally, to achieve professional perfection, you need a good flash gun with automatic TTL (through the lens) exposure metering. This ensures that the flash fires the correct amount of light for the combination of film-type and camera-to-subject distance. I even counterbalance the harsh shadow this can often give by using a second weaker flash from an opposing angle.
Don’t worry – this is only when it starts getting serious. Perfectly good results can be achieved by using your family SLR.
Many of you probably own a 35 mm camera with a standard 50 mm lens. These are excellent all-rounders suitable for landscapes, family groups etc. However should you wish to obtain a good close-up picture, of a butterfly for instance, you will probably have realised that the lens will not allow you to focus close enough to your subject. If your subject is something smaller than a butterfly then your results will be disappointing to say the least and correct identification may be impossible. This problem can be simply overcome by attaching a screw-on close-up filter to the front of your lens, a marvellous accessory and relatively cheap. These are available in differing strengths, allowing you to get very close. Try this method first on your field trips and you should get very acceptable results, aiding your identification problems, especially if you feel “awkward” about “taking” the specimen in question. I would recommend a good quality colour slide film with an ASA rating (film speed) of 200 for a fair chance of a decent result under normal daylight conditions.
Photographing insects is a wonderful way of expanding your interest and knowledge towards groups you may have ignored or been “afraid” of in the past because of identification problems. I have become more involved in widening my knowledge of coleoptera and this arose from one particular photograph I took in Trench Wood during 1996. I had no idea at the time what I was photographing but, with the aid of some excellent new books now available, I was able to identify it as one of the longhorn beetles (Cerambycidae): Stenocorus meridianus. Since then my fascination with longhorns has grown considerably and I have since managed to find and photograph rather localised species such as Saperda populnea(Trench Wood 30.6.96), Anaglyptus mysticus (River Avon, Eckington Bridge 27.5.97), Leptura rubra (Tiddesley Wood 19.7.97) Strangalia quadrifasciata (Monkwood 27.7.97) Phytoecia cylindrica (Monkwood 10.5.98) and Rhagium mordax (Knapp & Papermill 16.5.98). As a result of my success with this family of coleoptera I have also found that other beetle groups such as weevils and Chrysomelidae can also be identified from decent photographs, and of course many species are very beautiful when seen in detail.
So why not give it a try? You will be surprised how successful some of your pictures will be…..and like me you may be encouraged to learn more about lesser known groups of invertebrates. Don’t forget that you will be capturing forever the image if a real living creature in its natural environment as well as contributing greatly to recording the invertebrate fauna of our county.
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p. 15
GREEN WOODPECKERS: UNUSUAL FEEDING BEHAVIOUR
By Shaun Micklewright
On several occasions last winter I observed Green Woodpeckers Picus viridis attacking bee hives at Wilden Marsh near Kidderminster.I have never observed this type of behaviour by Green Woodpeckers before, although both Great Spotted Woodpecker Dendrocopos major and Nuthatch Sitta europea have been observed pecking bee hives. All six hives at Wilden show evidence of damage, some quite extensive.
On one occasion up to three birds were noted on one hive, where they had managed to drill through the outer wood of the hive and through the inner frame and appeared to be feeding on the honeycomb. According to Birds of the Western Palaearctic volume 4 this type of behaviour is quite rare having been recorded once during a hard winter in England where numerous attacks were made on hives: the birds drilled large holes but apparently no bees were eaten. The birds were apparently attracted by the humming noise of the bees. My own theory is that this type of behaviour is probably not so uncommon and where the opportunity arises for birds to prey on hives they quickly exploit this food source. I would be most interested to hear if any other recorders have come across this type of behaviour or if they know of any hives that have been damaged by Green Wooodpeckers.
Reference
| Cramp S (ed) (1977-93) Handbook of the Birds of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa: the Birds of the Western Palaearctic. OUP |
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p.7
COTTON-WOOL GALLS IN WORCESTERSHIRE
By Dan Puplett
The highly distinctive cotton-wool gall develops on the male catkins of oak trees. It is a fluffy mass of around 20-30 mm in diameter which, as the name suggests, resembles a ball of cotton-wool in appearance and texture. Caused by the uncommon cynipid wasp, Andricus quercusramuli, the structure actually conceals as many as 20 true galls, each containing a single larvae of the sexual generation. The pear-shaped galls of the asexual generation develop in the leaf-buds in late autumn, but are seldom recognised (Darlington 1975, Lewington & Streeter, 1994).
The first reported sighting of this gall in Worcestershire since 1978 was stumbled upon at Lower Smite Farm in late May. Keep an eye on pedunculate and sessile oaks for this striking and unusual growth which may be found during May and June (Connald, 1908).
Please send your records to John Meiklejohn at the Worcestershire BRC.
References:
| Connald, ET 1908. British Oak Galls. Adlard & Son: London. | |
| Darlington, A 1975 (revised). The Pocket Encyclopaedia of Plant Galls. Blandford Press. Poole. | |
| Lewington, R & Streeter, D 1993. The Natural History of an Oak Tree. Dorling Kindersley. London. |
Winter Blackcap Project
By David Ratcliffe
The sight of Blackcaps Sylvia atricapilla in the garden during the winter months has become a relatively common.
It has been suggested that they are a central European population of Blackcaps that have evolved a new migratory habit over the past thirty years or so, although conclusive evidence has not yet been found.
What does seem clear however, is that they have successfully adapted to our winters, and are making use of gardens and garden feeding in particular to survive.
I am interested in trying to discover what numbers may be present in Worcestershire during the winter months, where they might be found, and what types of food they are eating.
I would therefore like to hear about your sightings of these birds between October 1998 and March 1999, noting numbers present, their sex, where you saw them, and if feeding, on what. Other interesting information would also be welcomed such as their behaviour towards other species i.e. competing with other species etc.
Once I have worked through all the information I will submit an article for inclusion in future editions of either Worcestershire Wildlife News or Worcestershire Record.
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p.6
STONEWORTS IN WORCESTERSHIRE
By Bert Reid
On 2nd May this year I attended the official opening of Grafton Wood nature reserve. After the speeches I joined a group to walk from Church Farm to the wood to look at the new reserve. On the way we passed a small shaded pool in pasture by the footpath and in it I noticed a stonewort growing. It was not one I was familiar with, but I immediately recognised that it belonged to the genus Tolypella, with incurved balls of fertile branchlets and longer straight sterile branchlets.
This was an exciting find, since Worcestershire only has one known site for any Tolypella: T. glomerata from Feckenham Wylde Moor. I collected a sample to check back at home. When I investigated the plant in detail, I concluded that it was not T .glomerata as I had expected but was instead T. intricata. This is a Red Data Book species (status vulnerable) with only four British sites confirmed since 1970 (Stewart & Church 1992). I have sent my specimen to the national referee for checking my identification. Stoneworts are not familiar even to many experienced naturalists so I thought a brief note about them would be helpful to local recorders. They are a separate class, Characeae, of the green algae but have a very complex structure which makes them easily mistaken for higher plants. The grow entirely underwater and have a main stem with whorls of branchlets which may be divided. The general appearance is rather like an aquatic horsetail. Many of the species become heavily encrusted with calcium carbonate, making them quite hard and brittle, which gives them their common name.
They grow in a variety of water habitats such as lakes, ponds, gravel pits and canals but very rarely in fast flowing water. Some grow in quite deep water while others may colonise shallow temporary pools. Most species prefer calcareous water and most are intolerant of pollution. They are poor competitors and are easily crowded out by aquatic vascular plants. They are quick to colonise from oospores buried in the mud or carried by birds and are most likely to be noticed in newly dug or cleared waterbodies. More details can be found in Moore (1986) and Stewart & Church (1992).
In Worcestershire they are not common. Nine species have been recorded (or ten if the new record is confirmed) but most have only a handful of records. Chara curta is another Red Data Book species (status insufficiently known) with one record from Westwood Great Pool. I am also only aware of single recent records for Chara aspera, C. contraria and Tolypella glomerata. I do not have details of the record for Chara virgata and there are very few sites for C. globularis, C. hispida and Nitella flexilis. The only species that is of reasonably frequent occurrence is Chara vulgaris.
I would like to get a better picture of the distribution of stoneworts in Worcestershire and I encourage all recorders to look out for them. Please keep your eyes open when looking for newts, dragonflies etc. Don’t worry that you will not be able to identify them. Just pop a reasonable sized piece in a sealed plastic bag and send it to me with collection details (grid reference, date and collector) and I will look at it. If necessary I can send specimens to the national expert.
References:
| Moore, J.A. 1986. Charophytes of Great Britain and Ireland. London. Botanical Society of the British Isles. (Handbook No. 5) | |
| Stewart, N.F. & Church, J.M. 1992. Red Data Books of Britain and Ireland: Stoneworts. Peterborough. The Joint Nature Conservation Committee. |
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p. 10
ON THE TRIAL OF THE MARSH FROG
By Alan Shepherd
The Marsh Frog Rana ridibunda is an introduced species in Britain and is now well established in Kent and Surrey where noisy colonies regularly disturb people by croaking loudly and incessantly during late May and June.
The Pool Frog Rana lessonae may be a true native British species but controversy still rages over the colony in Norfolk which maybe a relict population or may be introduced.
The Edible Frog Rana esculenta is a fertile hybrid between the other two.
All are classed as Green Frogs while our Common or Grass Frog Rana temporaria is included in the Brown Frogs. This is how things are in Europe, and normally in Worcestershire we only encounter the Common Frog. So, as this goes to press, Will Watson and Alan Shepherd are frantically attempting to capture a Green Frog which has turned up at a fishing lake complex within the County, in order to establish its exact identity, with limited success.
You see, in order to distinguish between the three species one needs to examine the coloration of the back legs, and to be really certain one pushes the back legs together and see if they meet or overlap. Or you can tell the difference by feeding a recording of the croaking into an oscilloscope. Easy … except that both are extremely aquatic and wary and are usually seen as a streak that plops into the water from its sunning spot when you get within two metres … and they start croaking at about 9 pm on warm evenings, but seem to have a sixth sense about tape recorders.
We are in touch with colleagues in Kent and Surrey, one of whom can tell them apart by their calls without recourse to an oscilloscope but at the moment it’s a case of “Watch This Space” in the next BRC newsletter!
Reference:
| Arnold EN & Burton JA (1978) A Field Guide to the reptiles and amphibians of Britain and Europe. Collins |
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p.3
Pooling Our Knowledge For The Common Good
By Alan Shepherd
Everybody who reads this will obviously be an expert in one sphere or another when it comes to what we used to call Natural History but we now refer to under fancy titles like Biodiversity Monitoring (believe me, I have seen that term in use!) and we all submit records within the realms of our knowledge or more particularly of our specialised interests. Fine, it all helps to build up the greater picture but there is often a tendency to ignore anything else we may find on a site. This is due to the fact that many of us (if we are honest) tend to be “Anoraks” over our particular Loves. I will freely admit to this tendency and I hope some of you are honest enough in your self appraisals to do likewise. However, this can result in (dare I suggest it?) a more important species going unrecorded because we either don’t know what it is or worse still dismiss it as unworthy of our focused/blinkered attention.
On a day such as the proposed blitz in Grafton Wood there will be experts aplenty to snap up the unconsidered trifles that others miss (or dismiss) but when you are out in the field, especially on a site where access is limited do you ever consider telling somebody else that there is scope for surveying their particular speciality? Or even note it yourself? I hope you do but if not, examine your conscience and consider doing just that.
At the Herpetofauna Conference in Cardiff this year we heard a plea from the Mammal Society for records of Water Shrews – which have a liking for hiding under tin sheets used as refugia for Grass Snakes – and WRAG regularly carry a Bat detector when out at night around water bodies torching for amphibians. In exchange we have asked the Bat Group to shine their torches in the water and tell us if they see any Newts. You don’t even need to know what species it is, you merely have to mention it to the relevant volunteer surveyor and let them do the work. Better still, instead of going out alone take along a colleague who can look for something that you don’t want to/don’t know about/don’t even like.
At the recent meeting it was suggested that people who were willing to share recording duties could put their names forward on some form of central register and hopefully the Grafton day will demonstrate just how effective any form of blanket coverage can be.
Throw off your anorak and find a friend!
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p. 15
LUCK SOMETIMES HOLDS OUT
By Geoff Trevis
Harry Green and I have, for a long time, been meaning to arrange a visit to the cellars of the Worcester Museum where old natural history collections of national importance are held. From a preliminary visit at which we were kindly guided by the Curator, Mr. Garston Phillips, we knew that the flora, lepidoptera and coleoptera collections were in reasonable condition, though in need of cataloguing so that information can be published. Early in May we decided to make another visit to look at the hymenoptera collections which, Mr. Phillips told us, were in a fairly sorry state.
We met at about 9.30 a.m. and walked to the museum. Just outside my attention was drawn to a large hymenopteran, which at first I thought was some sort of bee, crawling across the pavement and about to be squashed flat by the hurrying Worcester commuters. I picked it up and examination revealed it to be a sawfly of a species neither Harry nor I had encountered before.
The first piece of luck was that Harry happened to have a collecting tube in his pocket – we had not expected to be collecting in the middle of Worcester. The specimen was duly “bagged” and put on one side for later identification.
Inside the museum Mr. Phillips conducted us into a small cellar, near the central heating boiler, in which was located a steel cupboard. The cupboard contained piles of old dirty boxes, some of which were labelled as containing hymenoptera. Space on a table had been cleared and we set to. Dust was blown from the first box, resulting in Harry having a worrying sneezing fit as he was on the receiving end of the cloud, the lid was lifted and there revealed were some of the dirtiest specimens I have seen, including some of the same type as the large hymenopteran we had just picked up outside! It was thus identified as a member of the genus Trichiosoma, probably tibiale (the Hawthorn Sawfly). Some doubt remained as the books we had noted that the taxonomy of this genus is still uncertain. Later reference to John Meiklejohn confirmed our identification. The species is recorded as having become considerably less common in recent years.
We marvelled at the probability of our finding it before it got squashed, having a container to put it in, and finding a similar specimen in the first box we opened in the museum! Lady luck was certainly smiling that day!
And what of the museum collections? The specimens are indeed in a bad state. They are covered in dirt and many are disintegrating. However, most are well labelled and we hope to get permission to go back to salvage what we can and catalogue the collection before the data is lost. There are odonata, diptera, homoptera, hemiptera and others as well as the hymenoptera so we have our work cut out. One or two boxes are likely to defeat us – these contain minute chalcid wasps and difficult ichneumon wasps. In the record of the boxes in which I have noted the contents and commented on their condition I found against these specimens I had put the single word “unspeakable”, referring not to their state but to the sheer impossibilty of naming them. Any offers?
By the way – these specimens were collected mainly around 1870, so they are at least 120 years old. The boxes? They are old cigar boxes with warped ill-fitting lids, impregnated with a century of city grime!
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p.1
REPORT OF THE RECORDERS’ MEETING HELD ON 13TH MAY 1998
By Geoff Trevis
About 20 of our leading recorders attended this meeting which proved a valuable stimulus to recording and an enjoyable social occasion. The main conclusions from the discussion are summarised below and we hope as many people as possible will contribute to the projects. However, please note that ALL records are still needed by the Record Centre and the lists and projects below are simply suggested areas for special attention!
Species Projects
Land Caddis Enoicyla pusilla
Reports of this species have been coming in from woods around the county and it may be more widespread that originally thought. This is the time to be looking for it in the leaf litter of old woods. Records should be sent to Harry Green from whom further information can be obtained. (Article in this issue)
Dandelions and Stoneworts (Charophytes)
Bert Reid has a special interest in these plants and will be grateful to receive specimens for identification, providing special criteria for collection are followed. – see Worcestershire Record vol 1 no 3 November 1997). The dandelions are a particularly diverse and critical group due to their asexual method of reproduction. Bert has been surveying them for the Worcestershire Flora Project.
He has also recently found an extremely rare stonewort in a Worcestershire pond and would like to obtain more records of the group. Please note, however, that care and knowledge are needed to collect specimens in a suitable condition for identification and anybody wanting to help will be well advised to contact Bert before collecting to get details of his requirements. (article in this issue about stoneworts).
Stag Beetle Lucanus cervus
This striking insect has been declining in recent years and a national survey is taking place to establish its current status. It is an easily identified species which has occasionally been recorded in the county, in Worcester, near Upton-on-Severn and two other sites in the south of the county. Records should be sent to Bronwen Bruce, Biodiversity Officer, at Lower Smite Farm. Leaflet enclosed
Water Shrew Neomys fodiens
Again a declining species whose current status is relatively unknown. Andy Graham, Otters and Wetlands Project Officer, will be running a course on 19th June at Lower Smite Farm about how to census this animal. Andy will be happy to supply information to anyone willing to help and to receive any records.
Weasel Mustela nivalis
Shaun Micklewright drew attention to the lack of records in recent times and it was agreed that any new records would be valuable. These can be sent to John Meiklejohn at the Records Centre. Please note that this refers to weasels and not stoats though, of course, records of stoats will be welcome at the Centre.
Dormouse Muscardinus avellanarius
As always, records of this elusive species will be of great interest. The easiest way to locate them is from the gnawed shells of nuts on which they have been feeding. Any records, and gnawed nuts to Bronwen Bruce at the Trust.
Earth Stars
These are a particulary interesting group of fungi which are generally easy to identify as Earth Stars though identification to species level is a job for the expert. If you find any do not pick them but make a note of their precise location and let Tim Bateman know (address below).
Giant Lacewing Osmylus fulvicephalus
This is the easiest lacewing to identify and Brett Westwood is interested in determining its distribution in Worcestershire. It can often be disturbed from vegetation overhanging streams. Records to the Record Centre please.
Shining Black Ant Lasius fuliginosus
This is a shining black species which is difficult to mistake for anything else. Records to Brett Westwood via the Record Centre.
Volucella zonaria (a hoverfly)
This is a very large and very striking hoverfly which seems to be extending its range northwards from Europe into Britain (global warming?). Harry Green and Brett Westwood are interested in establishing its presence in Worcestershire and records may be sent directly to Harry Green.
Woad Isatis tinctoria
Brett Westwood has followed the extraordinary appearance from nowhere and subsequent spread of this plant along the A449 dual carriageway and at the A449 junction with the M5. He would be interested in receiving records from any other part of the county. Although the flowers will be fading by the time you read this the plant is easily recognised by its dark seed pods.
A snail Hygromia cinctella
Avid watchers of the BBC One evening news programme Midlands Today will know that this snail was found by David Green in his garden at Little Comberton. Previously it has been regularly recorded only in the Devon with a few isolated records in the southern counties further to the east. It has been extending its range in recent years and it’s presence in Worcestershire is the most northerly records so far. Further records would be most valuable. Information can be obtained from David Green who would also welcome the records. He has also prepared a fact-sheet, available from the Trust, which is up-dated by an article in this issue.
Spiders
John Partridge is our county spider expert and would like to receive any records though he is specially interested in the three species listed at the annual biological recording meeting in March. These species are the Daddy Longlegs spider Pholcus phalangioides, the Spitting Spider Scytodes thoracicus and the Six-eyed Tube Dweller Segestria senocules. (Article in this issue).
Other species which were mentioned included grasshoppers and the House Cricket. It was pointed out that the House Cricket is sold as food for exotic spiders and records may well reflect the location of spider keepers rather than the distribution of native populations of the cricket.Some of the above species may be included on projects launched to involve the general public.If you would like more information please contact myself, Geoff Trevis, Harry Green or the named recorder at the addresses given or through the BRC at Lower Smite Farm.
Site based Recording
1998 Recording Day
This year’s site is Grafton Wood. The recording day is Saturday 11th July commencing 10.30 am and we hope as many people as possible will come along to help. Experts will be on hand to lead groups focusing on particular taxa. Meet in the car park by Grafton Church at grid reference SO 963557. A booking form is included with this issue.
NB If anybody who was invited to the 13th May meeting who has not already been contacted about the Grafton meeting, would be willing to act as a leader for their chosen area of specialisation would they please contact me as soon as possible This is a great opportunity to develop interest in recording and all help will be welcomed. Details for leaders will be sent separately.
Other Sites
As we are well aware, records for the county are all too sparse. However, some sites deserve priority attention and of these two have been suggested – the less well recorded parts of the Wyre Forest and the limestone hills around Abberley. We will try to arrange recording days at appropriate locations. In the meantime if you happen to be in these sites please remember to make sure you submit any records.
Panel of Referees
One aspect of recording which is of great importance is having expert referees who are willing to help the less experienced with identifications and to validate records of more difficult taxa. So far I have four people willing to act in this role. Specimens may be sent to them but if a reply is requested please ensure a stamped, self addressed envelope is included. Records and specimens sent to the Records Centre may also be referred to an expert for validation. The referees so far are:
Lichens: Mr. Trevor Duke
Fungi: Mr. Tim Bateman
Spiders: Mr John Partridge
Beetles and freshwater invertebrates: Dr. Don Goddard
If anyone else at the meeting volunteered their help, or indeed would like to do so now, please let me know. Access to expert help is so crucial to those of us who are less expert and any offers will be greatly appreciated.
Worcestershire Invertebrate Group
Kevin McGee and I feel that a Worcestershire Invertebrate Group would be useful as a focus for recording. It is not intended that the group would become involved with groups already well covered e.g. lepidoptera and odonata but rather would focus on those families and orders where few people are involved and where they may be working largely in isolation. Mutual interest and help can go a long way to developing and sustaining individual activity!
Kevin has been sending records to me which are added to my own to begin to build a specifically invertebrate data base. The records are, of course, also sent to the BRC! Kevin’s interest in photography also stimulated the idea of building a library of slides of Worcestershire invertebrates which can be used for lectures, publicity and publications. This is going well although I have to admit I have not yet got all my own pictures filed and catalogued in the right place. We would hope to produce a newsletter in which we could publish details of records and activities, this being in addition to more important or widely appealing news published in the Worcestershire Record. Finally we would aim to hold some field meetings and put people with similar interests in touch.
This is very much an idea in its infancy but I would like to hear from anybody who feels that an invertebrate group would be of interest and would potentially like to join. Please write to me, Geoff Trevis.
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p.1 This article is outdated and remains for Archive purposes only
Worcestershire BRC Developments
By Geoff Trevis, Management Advisory Group Chairman
Preparation of a business plan and operating procedures for the BRC is being held up as we are waiting for information to come from national office. However, our priority is to establish the rules governing data validation, ownership of data and information retrieval and supply to clients. Many difficult issues are involved and background papers have been circulated to members of the Management Advisory Group for their consideration prior to a rescheduled meeting which will take place during the next couple of months. However, the delay in drafting operating policies and procedures has not prevented continuing development of the computerised data base which is being done mainly by Martyn Hodgson and Richard Nicol. Historical records in the filing card system are being computerised at present but hopefully it will not be too long before we can “go live” and begin putting on records as they are submitted.
The most positive development was a meeting of leading county recorders at Lower Smite Farm at which projects for the coming year were discussed and a nucleus of people volunteered to be listed as referees for various taxa. This beginning of an expert panel is a significant step forward and more details are given in the meeting report.
Worcestershire Record No. 4 May 1998 p. 9
THE ACID FLOWERS
By Brett Westwood
It ought be the name of a rock band, but Worcestershire’s “Acid Flowers” are much more self-effacing. We’re still finding them, tucked away in the folds of the countryside around Kidderminster where the new red sandstone runs just below the surface, or the Bunter pebble beds blunt the farmers’ harrows. These are a select company of plants which favour the light sandy soils in the north, but which have received very little attention from conservationists. This could be because many of them are annuals and very small annuals at that. They also tend to bloom very early in the year, sprouting , blooming, seeding and dying in the space of a few months to capitalise on the limited moisture that their habitat holds in winter and spring. By the time the midsummer sun has loosened the sand grains around their roots, the next generation’s seeds are already sown, waiting for autumn rains to trigger germination.
The acid-loving annuals are thermophilous too…they love spring heat and flourish where early sun warms the soil. And that means they can’t tolerate competition from grasses or any tall vegetation. It follows that the best sites are south-facing, on a slope which can’t be ploughed or isn’t worth re-seeding and where the turf is short. It’s surprising how many grasslands in north Worcestershire fit the bill and how tiny they can be. In Wilden Lane near Hartlebury Common there are some superb garden lawns, too steep for even a Flymo, which have an amazing collection of acid plants. By contrast, there are still large hillsides as, for example, at Deansford and Churchill, where the flora probably hasn’t changed for a century or more, though rabbits have come and gone….and come back again!
Rabbits are the final ingredient, because they keep down the competing vegetation. Sheep do the same job, only with less discrimination, and horses take the huge bunches of false oat and cocksfoot grass which spell doom to delicate annuals…..good conservation tools, horses!
So, what do these diminutive early-flowerers look like? Some are very small indeed, like the Whitlow-grass (Erophila verna) which frosts the ground in some places. It’s normally no more than 5cm high and begins blooming in February , not only in sandy fields, but on walltops and road verges too. This is a critical group of plants..the commonest in Worcestershire is ssp verna, but the hairy Erophila majuscula grows in one field at Churchill and is probably overlooked.
With Erophila you often find two species of forget-me-not. The commoner is the Changing Forget-me-not (Myosotis discolor) which has creamy-yellow buds opening into blue flowers. It’s still fairly common in many fields and is an indicator that rarer plants might be in the offing. One of these is its relative the Early Forget-me-not (Myosotis ramosissima) which flowers from late March and has tiny, but intensely blue flowers which don’t change colour. Recently it shows ferroviatic tendencies, swapping its loyalties from fields to railway banks and can sometimes be found on dry, sunny sidings where the grass is short or absent.
Without exception every acid pasture worth checking has one species which I’ve come to regard as my “indicator plant”. This is the Small Mouse-ear (Cerastium semidecandrum) ,an annual which flowers from late March to May. It likes bare ground, especially around rabbit burrows and is safe from them because it’s hairy strap-shaped leaves are flush to the ground and very small! Early on it can be hard to tell from the Common Mouse-ear (Cerastium fontanum) which is perennial and has non-flowering vegetative shoots. In bloom, Small Mouse-ear is obvious because its white petals are much shorter than their enclosing sepals…..these sepals have a transparent border which is very distinctive.
Another speciality with a common “look-alike” is the Lesser Chickweed (Stellaria pallida). You need to look for this on gravelly or sandy soils where there is little or no competition..and you need to look early! In 1998 I found plants in bloom on February 1st, though “bloom” is an extravagant word for a plant with no petals…the flower is little more than a green seed-capsule fringed by up to three stamens. however, the overall appearance often gives this chickweed away. It’s a light yellow-green in colour and produces large mats of foliage, often under conifers in gardens. Beware apetalous forms of Common Chickweed (Stellaria media) which usually has larger, darker green leaves and from three to eight stamens. Along with many other acid-loving plants, Lesser Chickweed has taken to roadsides and shares central reservations in Kidderminster with Small Mouse-ear and Buck’s-horn Plantain (Plantago coronopus).
Two members of the pea family excel on sand. Bird’s-foot (Ornithopus perpusillus) is a delicate grey-green annual with tiny white flowers and is common in north Worcestershire though rare or absent in the south. It is often one of the earliest colonists of sand quarries or building sites and can produce several generations in a season.
Spring Vetch (Vicia lathyroides) is a real blue-riband plant on the sandstone and finding it is worth hours bent double in an April gale, scouring the turf for signs of its dull purple flowers. Its traditional sites were always in the Hartlebury Common area, but Amphlett & Rea also gave it as occurring in “sandy fields east of Kidderminster” in the mid 1800s. On checking these out for the Worcestershire Flora Project, I found that there are at least eight sites in the Kidderminster area, including one of thousands at Deansford, and others at Ismere, Wilden and Habberley. These are important populations of a plant which is very local in Britain and which is rare in the Midlands. The only cautionary note I would offer is to avoid mistaking Spring Vetch for Common Vetch (Vicia sativa) which has larger, brighter flowers….Spring vetch blooms are very small and quietly purple. Occasionally you can find fields which have all these plants.
Then it’s time to start looking for the real specialities such as Field Pansy (Viola tricolor) which still flowers on a scrambling course at Wilden. There are special perennials too. Hoary Cinquefoil (Potentilla argentea) is still surprising us on sandy banks in several parts of the county, though mainly in the north, and there must Be more to discover. And, if you’d like a challenge – what about finding a new site for Subterranean Clover (Trifolium subterraneum) which hugs the ground on one horse-cropped bank at Habberley?
The challenge is there……so go sand-seeking this summer!
References:
| Amphlett,, J & Rea, C (1909) The Botany of Worcestershire. Cornish Brothers. Birmingham. | |
| Stace, C (1997) 2nd ed. New Flora of the British Isles. CUP. | |
| Ross-Craig, S (1948-1973) Drawings of British Plants. Bell. London |