Statistics of insect catch within historic properties

Peter Brimblecombe,Caroline Brimblecombe,Dee Lauder,David Thickett

doi:10.1186/2050-7445-1-34

Peter Brimblecombe, Caroline Brimblecombe + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1186/2050-7445-1-34

Copy DOI

Abstract

IntroductionCertain species of insect are known to cause damage to historic collections. For more than a decade insects have been identified in traps set out in English Heritage properties, the data from which has been used in this paper. Descriptive statistics have been used to explore the data structure and insect distribution.ResultsAbout 55% of the traps of the more than 30000 traps examined over that period contained insects that were readily categorised. The rate of catch (insects/trap) was highest in London and the Southeast. Booklice (Liposcelis bostrychophila) and silverfish (Lepisma saccharina) were the most frequent catch. Woolly bear (Anthrenus spp.) larvae and crustacean woodlice (Porcellio spinicornis) were also common. A higher frequency of furniture beetles (Anobium punctatum) is notable in the Southeast and West. Despite this overall pattern, catch varied greatly between individual properties. The general view that insects have increased over time was not universal, although the dominant booklouse showed an increased catch over the last decade. The insects did not appear to be randomly distributed, but clustered onto traps in greater numbers than might be expected from a Poisson distribution, which suggested they occurred as infestations. Some insect species appeared in combination with other species at a higher frequency than expected, but the reasons for these associations were not always obvious. Pheromone traps collected more webbing and case bearing clothes moths (Tineola bisselliella, Tinea pellionella) than traps without attractants, much as expected. There are hints that covered traps may collect fewer insects than simple blunder traps.ConclusionsNo obvious drivers of high insect count were identified. Trends over time were not especially clear. The results provide clues to management of insect pests in historic properties. The presence and trapping of insects at a given property is individual in nature, and so mitigation strategies need to be site-specific. Although an insect might occur in low numbers in some periods, the possibility of infestation remains. Future work will examine the trends in catch more carefully and ascertain the importance of various environmental factors.

Highlights

Certain species of insect are known to cause damage to historic collections
Insect pests attack furniture and textiles as well as the structure of wooden buildings, which is of great concern in historic properties
The traps consist of sticky museum traps [8] sometimes termed blunder traps as in Figure 1a), along with smaller numbers of “bat proof” traps, plastic floor traps (Figure 1b) with sticky inserts, and pheromone-containing traps for some moths [9]

Summary

Introduction

Certain species of insect are known to cause damage to historic collections. Insect pests attack furniture and textiles as well as the structure of wooden buildings, which is of great concern in historic properties. Damaging to historic materials, are the larval stages of carpet beetle (Anthrenus spp.) and clothes moths (Lepidoptera: Tineidae), which feed on textiles, fur and leather, beetles. Awareness of the impact of a warmer climate has grown in recent years, along with concerns about its influence on the appearance of new species in historic collections. Their discovery may arise from greater movement of objects between collections, which transports insects between properties. There is the potential impact of changes in food [5], wider use of natural fabrics, and a more cautious approach to the use of pesticides [2]

Methods

Results

Conclusion