The National Trust has reached a significant nature target a year early. The charity strived to restore 25,000 hectares of crucial habitat across the UK by 2025, including peatland, woodland, wetland, meadow and saltmarsh, and succeeded in doing so in August this year. The restoration comes as a response to climate change and national conservation targets and seeks to expand meadows and woodland to create a connected network for wildlife.
Eighty Water Voles have been released to restore ancient landscapes in Cornwall. Considered ‘ecosystem engineers’ these mammals are known to positively impact soil health and plant diversity through grazing and enhanced nutrient transportation. The voles were released along the River Fowey to improve the surrounding wetland habitat created in 2022.Afurther 120 have been released near Megavissey, and more releases are planned for spring next year.
Three years of restoration work have seen the return of endangered birds in Hertfordshire.Work has come to a close on the Ashridge Estate, the largest woodland maintained by the National Trust – over 24 hectares have been restored by clearing dense areas of plantation, which has allowed more light to reach the ground through the canopy. Greater access to sunlight has improved biodiversity and the availability of food sources, andthe clearing will provide suitable conditions for many breeding birds, including Spotted Flycatchers which have been spotted on the estate after several years of absence.
Conservation
Conservationists are relocating Florida’s Queen Conches in a bid to support theirreproduction. This iconic mollusc has undergone significant declinesin recent years, accelerated by increasing ocean temperaturescausing lethargy and infertility for individuals residing in warmer, shallow waters. By relocating these gastropods to deeper, colder waters, researchers are providing new mating opportunities in a more suitable environment. Listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, this project is helping to ease reproductive pressures on this species.
In August, the UK government announced a goal to end all badger culls by the end of this parliamentary run. The newswas announced as part of a new scientifically–informed and evidence-based eradication strategy for bovine tuberculosis, which hopes to eradicate the disease by 2038. In the past decade, over 230,000 badgers and 278,000 cattle have been slaughtered, costing the taxpayer over £100m each year. Badgers will instead be vaccinated and released, and a dedicated task force will be formed to ramp up vaccination rates.
Wildlife
Five species of seabird have been added to the UK red list. Arctic Tern, Great Skua, Leach’s Storm Petrel, Common Gull and Great Black Backed Gull have joined the list of species most in need of conservation, followingpopulation declines due to a number ofpressures including climate change, habitat lossand unsustainable fishing. Over 30% of all British birds are currently on the list including Kittiwakes, Puffins and Arctic Skuas, among others.
Researchers have found promise in the medicinal plants used by critically endangered Western Lowland Gorillas in Gabon. The group studied the tropical plants eaten by gorillas in Moukalaba Doudou National Park and found four trees also used by localhealers. They are high in antioxidants and antimicrobials, and one tree is a promising candidate for tackling superbugs. All four species (Fromager trees, Fig Tree, African Teak and Giant Yellow Mulberry) show activity against a resistant strain of E. coliand contain chemicals with medicinal effects useful for treating a range of ailments.
The collectives formed by social insects fascinate us, whether it is bees, ants, or termites. But it would be a mistake to think that the individuals making up such collectives are just mindless cogs in a bigger machine. It is entirely reasonable to ask, as pollination ecologist Stephen Buchmann does here, What a Bee Knows. This book was published almost a year after Lars Chittka’s The Mind of a Bee, which I reviewed previously. I ended that review by asking what Buchmann could add to the subject. Actually, despite some unavoidable overlap, a fair amount.
Though I will leave a comparison and recommendation for the end of this review, I can already tell you that What a Bee Knows is a different beast altogether. Buchmann’s approach to convincing you that bees are sophisticated insects is to provide a general and wide-ranging introduction to bee biology, telling you of all the things they get up to.
What makes this introduction accessible to a broad audience is that Buchmann goes back to first principles. For starters, what even is a bee, and where did they come from? You might not realise that they evolved from carnivorous predatory wasps and likely did so some 130 million years ago, not long after the evolution of flowering plants. Another basic aspect Buchmann highlights is how myopically focused we are on social bees. The thing is, 80% of all 20,000+ described bee species are solitary. Their biology is the more representative one and Buchmann discusses examples from their lonesome lives throughout this book, many based on his observations working in the Sonoran Desert of Arizona and elsewhere. He reminds the reader that “we should not think of honey bees as the pinnacle of bee evolution toward which all bee species strive” (p. 32). Theirs is the exception; a high-risk, high-reward strategy to making a living on this planet.
This approach of introducing basic concepts is applied throughout the book. Thus, we get a brief tour of the gross anatomy of the bee brain, but not before Buchmann explains the basics of the human brain and the structure and workings of neurons. An introduction to sexual selection prefixes the discussion on the many sexual escapades of bees: from scramble competition in cactus bees involving bee brawls (which is exactly what it sounds like), to hilltop lekking in carpenter bees, to alternative reproductive tactics with different male morphs in Centris pallida. Bees can learn to solve problems, improve their performance, and even learn new tricks from other bees, but what is this process called learning, and how widespread is it? Similarly, chapters on sleep, pain, and consciousness all first discuss more broadly what these are and what we know about them in humans and other vertebrate and invertebrate organisms.
Buchmann is a pollination ecologist by training and he cannot help but indulge in a long chapter on pollination. He is on form here and gleefully reminds readers that, next to billboards for pollinators, “flowers are unabashedly plant genitals exposed on a stem for all to see” (p. xiii), while bees act as “surrogate flying flower penises” (p. 78). Though it is traditionally held up as a wholesome form of mutualism, it has elements of an arms race too. As Jeff Ollerton also points out, active pollination, where a pollinator deliberately places pollen on a flower’s stigma, is extremely rare. Rather, the norm is that both pollinators and flowers have their own interests (food and pollination), at heart first and foremost. Sometimes both parties will benefit, but this is not a given. Orchids trick male bees into pseudocopulation with flowers that look and smell just like female bees, dusting them in pollen in the process without offering any nectar. At the other extreme, carpenter bees have become nectar robbers, using their jaws to cut into flowers at their base to access nectar, and thus not providing pollination services. And here is an interesting recent development: studies on the bee microbiome suggest that bees derive some of the microbial life that populates their gut from the flowers on which they forage. In some cases, the proteins contributed by flower microbes might be more nutritious than the pollen grains.
A chapter on sensory biology is, of course, obligatory and Buchmann covers all relevant topics: the trichromatic vision of bees that extends into the ultraviolet, their perception of polarized light used in navigation, their excellent smell, their hearing (which is more a detection of pressure waves at close range), their taste and tactile senses, their to-us-alien detection of electrical charges (and the electrostatic footprints bees leave on flower petals after a visit), and the still contentious topic of magnetoreception. What was new to me is that the two mobile antennae produce a three-dimensional impression of an odour field, and some nifty experiments that involved crossing their antennae resulted in bees persistently walking away from the source of a smell, indicating that they really do smell in stereo.
Though an accessible and enjoyable romp into bee biology, I do have a few minor quibbles. There is a limited number of general black-and-white illustrations and photos, and the reproduction of the latter is so-so as this is a print-on-demand book. And though What a Bee Knows avoids getting too technical, I do feel that in some places Buchmann wanders a bit off-piste from exploring the inner world of bees into more general fascinating tales of bee biology. Nevertheless, the book achieves its mission of instilling a renewed respect and a better understanding of how bees live.
Having now reviewed both Chittka’s The Mind of a Bee and Buchmann’s What a Bee Knows, how do they compare and which one should you read? Both books broadcast the same message loud and clear: bees are darn sophisticated creatures and even individually are far smarter and more capable than you might initially give them credit for. As mentioned, Buchmann goes back to first principles on many topics and wanders into bee biology more generally, while I remarked that Chittka delivers an information-dense book with numerous explanatory illustrations that is very focused in its approach, talking bees, bees, and the occasional other hymenopteran. Consequently, Buchmann does not delve as deeply into many subjects, though he does discuss some experiments in detail (including Chittka’s work on several occasions). My recommendation would be that general readers with little background in biology or entomology pick, or first start with, What a Bee Knows. Biologists, in particular entomologists, might want to skip straight to Chittka’s The Mind of a Bee and get stuck in the wealth of detail there.
What a Bee Knows by Stephen Buchmann is available from our online bookstore.
Here in the UK, we have 11 species of grasshopper and 23 species of cricket (around ten of these being bush-crickets), both subfamilies belonging to the order Orthoptera. Although similar in appearance, the two can be separated by their antennae – grasshoppers have short, stout appendages and bush-crickets have longer, thinner antennae. Bush-crickets also have a larger body size than grasshoppers, growing up to 5cm in length, and females have a distinctive ovipositor used to lay eggs.
Here, we look at a few species of grasshoppers and bush-crickets found in the UK, detailing ways to ID them and where they can be found.
ID Notes: Up to 2.5cm in length. This grasshopper is usually a mottled brown colour, but can vary from brown to grey, orange and purple. It has barring on the sides, and a very hairy underside which is the most straightforward way to identify this species. It is winged and able to fly. Their song consists of short, single chirrups repeated at short intervals.
Distribution: Common and widespread throughout Britain. Common Field Grasshoppers can be seen from May to October on short vegetation in dry, warm days. They can be found in grassy areas including farmland, grassland, heathland, moorland, towns and gardens.
ID Notes: Up to 2.3cm in length. Meadow Grasshoppers are usually green in colour, with some individuals brown or pink-purple coloured (pictured above). The wings are often brown and are long in males, whereas female wings are short and do not reach the end of the abdomen. This species has distinctive black knees and a dark brown stripe running across the flank to the eye. They are similar in appearance to Common Field Grasshoppers, but lack a hairy underside, which can be used to distinguish them from one another. Their song is a burst of around ten chirrups, making a ‘rrr’ sound.
Distribution: Common and widespread throughout Britain. Meadow Grasshoppers can be seen from April to October in damp pastures with long grass. They can also be found in meadows, grassland, heathland and moorland.
Common Green Grasshopper (Omocestus viridulus)
Image by Billy Lindblom via Flickr
ID Notes: Up to 2.3cm in length. As the name suggests, this species is mostly green in colour, but males can also be olive brown. Lines on the shoulders are incurved and white or cream in colour. Common Green Grasshoppers are winged and can fly, but their wings do not exceed the body’s length. They produce a long, loud ticking song which can last for 20 seconds or more and is reminiscent of a fast-paced freewheeling bicycle.
Distribution: Common and widespread throughout Britain, although a little patchier in the lowlands. This species appears early in spring and can be seen from April to September. It can be found in coarse, moist grass in meadows, woodland rides, hillside pastures and farmland.
ID Notes: Up to 2cm in length. This small grasshopper is most easily identified by its antennae – males’ are club-tipped, and females’ have a thickened tip. The body has several colour variations including green, brown, grey and orange. Their song is a repetitive ‘zrr’ ‘zrr’ sound lasting around ten seconds before stopping abruptly.
Distribution: Widely distributed across the UK, but uncommon. Mottled Grasshoppers can be found from April to October in areas of dry, short grass with access to rocks or bare ground, including grasslands, heathland and old quarries.
ID Notes: Up to 1.7cm in length. This species is the UK’s only native, arboreal cricket. It has a slender, lime green body with a yellow-orange or brown strip running along its back. Both sexes are fully winged, with wings reaching the end of the abdomen. Females have a long, upturned ovipositor and males have a pair of shorter, rounded claspers. The males do not produce a song, but instead drum their hind legs on nearby leaves.
Distribution: Common, found in England and Wales. The Oak Bush Cricket is common in the midlands and the south but is absent further north. It can be found in the canopy of mature trees in woods, hedges, garden shrubs and other deciduous trees from June to November.
ID Notes: Up to 2.1cm in length. This species is typically reddish to dark brown, with occasional yellow green through the abdomen and a paler area along the top of the thorax. It has very small forewings and long, hair-like antennae. Females have a large, upcurved ovipositor.
Distribution: Fairly common in central and southern England and Wales, where it can be found in woodland, hedgerows, grassland, farmland, towns and gardens. It can often be spotted in large numbers around bramble patches, where they are basking in the sun.
Roesel’s Bush Cricket (Metrioptera roeselii)
Image by Charlie Jackson via Flickr
ID Notes: A short-winged and usually flightless species, Roesel’s Bush Crickets are typically dark brown or yellow in colour, sometimes tinged green. They have a green face, slightly orange legs and a cream-coloured margin to their thorax, with two or three yellow spots on the side. Their monotonous song is recognisable for its long, mechanical sound.
Distribution: Common, found mostly in the southeast of the UK, but currently expanding its range north and west. This species can be found from June to October in rough grassland, scrub, salt marshes and damp meadows.
ID Notes: This large bush-cricket can easily be distinguished by its size, growing up to 7cm long. It is a vibrant green with an orange-brown stripe running the length of its back. Their wings are typically longer than the abdomen, and females have a long, downward curved ovipositor. This species has a loud, long song which sounds like a high-pitched sewing machine running continuously.
Distribution: Common throughout south England and Wales. It can be found from May to October in scrub, woodland, grassland and heathland, with a preference for light, dry soils.
The first guide to the 261 species of orthopterans of Britain and western Europe ever published. Features stunning, detailed images and information on the distribution and identification criteria. Includes a CD with over 200 orthopteran songs to aid identification.
A photo-based identification guide covering 28 native breeding species of the UK. This guide is part of FSC’s AIDGAP series (Aids to Identification in Difficult Groups of Animals and Plants), providing accessible identification tools for naturalists over the age of sixteen.
If you look under logs, stones or through piles of leaf litter, you may find a Myriapod (a type of arthropod with many legs, related to insects and spiders). Although these misunderstood animals may strike fear in some, these invertebrates play a vital role in maintaining our ecosystems. One of their main roles lies in nutrient cycling, where they feed on organic matter and detritus, breaking materials down into a simpler form and thus releasing nutrition back into the soil. They also play an important role, both as predators and prey, in the ecosystem’s food chain and are often celebrated for their effectiveness as a natural biocontrol agent.
The UK has more than 50 species of centipede. This group are generally carnivorous and have around fifteen pairs of legs, with one pair present on each body segment. They have large forcipules, a pair of pincer-like, modified front legs that are used to inject venom into their prey. There are around 65 species of millipede in the UK, which can be distinguished by their shorter, more clubbed antennae, the absence of forcipules and their tendency to have two pairs of legs on most body segments.
Here, we look at a few species of centipede and millipede that can be found in the UK, detailing ways to ID them and where they can be found.
ID Notes: Also known as the Brown Centipede, Lithobius forficatus is one the largest centipede species in the UK, growing up to 3cm in length. They have long, thin segmented bodies that are a reddish-chestnut brown colour. Each segment has one pair of legs, with 15 pairs in total. They have long antennae and an elongated pair of back legs, giving the illusion of a second pair of antennae at the rear of the body. This species is best identified by thorned projections on the outer edges of the 9th, 11th and 13th segments.
Distribution: Very common and widespread across the UK. This species can be found year-round but is most numerous in spring and autumn. They can be found in a variety of habitats, including woodland, grassland and gardens, and will spend most of the day nesting in soil or sheltered areas under stones, bark or dead wood before emerging at night to hunt for prey.
ID Notes: Similar in colour to the Common Centipede, Lithobius microps is a ground-dwelling species that is usually chestnut brown in colour, although red and orange varieties can also be found. It is much smaller than its common cousin, reaching around 1cm in length, and its 15 pairs of legs are slightly shorter and paler than those of the Common Centipede.
Distribution: Fairly common in the south of Britain. This fast-moving species can be found year-round in gardens and bare soil in rotting wood and under rocks and stones.
ID Notes: Measuring up to 3cm in length, this small, yellow-brown centipede is easily distinguished by the banding on its legs – these alternate pale and dark, are usually brown in colour and are more obvious on the rear pairs. It has a dark band running centrally along its back and much larger jaws when compared to other Lithobius species.
Distribution: Widespread and common in the UK. It can be found year-round living under stones and decaying plant matter during the day, and is commonly found in garden compost heaps.
ID Notes: This millipede grows to around 2.5cm in length, with a width of 4mm. It has a long, flat body with around 20 body segments, each containing between one and two pairs of legs. It is orange-brown in colour and has numerous off-white coloured legs.
Distribution: Widespread and common in the UK. They can be found in almost any environment in which millipedes occur, with frequent sightings in woodland under dead wood and leaf litter.
ID Notes: Up to 3cm in length, this species is one of the largest millipedes found in Britain. It is thick and cylindrical in shape, usually dark brown to black in colour. It has orange coloured stripes running the length of its body on its back, but these can sometimes appear as a series of orange patches.
Distribution: Common and widespread throughout Britain and Ireland. The Striped Millipede can be found year-round in meadows, fields and woodland under leaf litter and logs. It is also known to climb on walls and trees to feed on algae and can be found during the day.
ID Notes: The White-legged Snake Millipede can grow to around 6cm in length. It is tubular-shaped with a shiny black body and contrasting white legs, of which there are around 100. Immature millipedes are brown, often with pale, longitudinal stripes down the back. It has a pointed telson (legless tail segment) at the end of its body.
Distribution: Common and widespread in the UK. This species can be found year-round in most habitats containing millipedes, including woodland and gardens, or areas with rocks or rotting vegetation to provide cover.
A comprehensive atlas of the 55 species of centipede in Britain and Ireland,.tThis guide provides species accounts, distribution maps and detailed colour photographs for easy identification.
Britain’s rarest plant has been rediscovered in Britain for the first time since 2009. Having been declared extinct after a 22 year absence, a single Ghost Orchid was recently discovered by Richard Bate who has spent the last 30 years searching for it, marking the end of the plant’s lengthy absence. The location of this rare specimen will remain concealed to protect the delicate flower from trampling and poaching, while scientists work to protect the orchid from natural predators and grazing animals.
DNA analysis is helping to eradicate the American Mink from East Anglia. This invasive species has been decimating Britain’s Water Vole and seabird populations since the 1970s, and authorities are now utilising DNA technology to manage their population. Using this key technology, the Waterlife Recovery Trust can estimate relatedness between individuals, identify how far animals may have travelled and pinpoint access routes to remove re-entry points, thus eradicating populations within the project area. The trust has successfully cleared East Anglia of this invasive species, and have seen no signs of mink reproduction in the core project area, resulting in a distinct increase in Water Vole presence.
The world’s fish stocks are in a worse state than previously thought. Research suggests that the scientific recommendations informing fisheries policy are too optimistic and that more global fish stocks have collapsed or are overfished than originally estimated. The study suggests that around a third of ‘maximally sustainably fished’ stocks are actually overfished, which can lead to phantom recoveries where declining stocks are thought to be recovering. The study calls for simpler, more conservative stock assessments and management that are quantified based on realistic models.
Wildlife
An RSPB survey has revealed a hotspot for a threatened species. Data collected from April to June across East Yorkshire and Lincolnshire has found 420 breeding pairs of Redshank on the Humber Estuary, a hotspot for these threatened birds. With a total population of 22,000, this environment holds around 2% of the entire population and is now considered a highly important area for this species of conservation concern.
A network of wildlife charities is calling for the release of beavers across the UK. Following a successful summer of breeding, the trusts have seen an upsurge in kit sightings throughout the UK, sparking a call for further management and strategy surrounding the species. These organisations are calling for the government to produce reintroduction strategies to facilitate their return across the UK and are urging authorities to allow illegally released beavers to remain in their release sites, of which there are over 1,000 in Scotland.
Environment
Countryside river testing reveals pharmaceutical pollution across the UK. Researchers from the University of York tested 54 locations and revealed contamination at 52 sites, with the most common pollutants including antidepressants, antibiotics, antihistamines and diabetes treatments, among others. The study found that rivers in the Peak District were more polluted than samples taken in London, with a total of 29 active pharmaceuticals detected in the region. This discovery marks concerns for antibiotic resistance, human health and concern for the health of freshwater organisms residing in the waterway.
Hoverflies of Britain and Ireland is a beautifully illustrated photographic field guide that details the hoverfly species readily available in Great Britain. This revised and updated third edition details 13 additional species and features more than 840 stunning photographs, alongside a host of other improvements to aid reliable identification. As such, this is the most accessible, authoritative and easy-to-use guide available, and a must-read for all entomologists and naturalists alike.
Stuart Ball and Roger Morris have been running the Hoverfly Recording Scheme since 1991 and published the Provisional Atlas of British Hoverflies in 2000. Stuart and Roger both worked as entomologists for the statutory nature conservation agencies, are both active members of the Dipterists Forum, a society that promotes the study of flies, and have subsequently run many hoverfly identification courses prior to their retirement.
We recently had the opportunity to talk to both Stuart and Roger about the book, including how they first became interested in working with hoverflies, where the ‘new species’ that are now detailed in the third edition have come from and more.
Firstly, can you tell us a little about yourselves and your history of working with hoverflies?
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, we worked for the Nature Conservancy Council’s ‘Invertebrate Site Register’ and were active entomologists with a broad interest in flies. Alan Stubbs, our boss at the time, was looking to re-vitalise the Hoverfly Recording Scheme following Philip Entwistle’s retirement and twisted our arms to take it on. The idea was to combine Stuart’s interest in computing and data interpretation, and Roger’s interest in hoverflies, to try to get the scheme back off the ground. At that time there were about two cubic metres of record cards and about 50,000 computerised records. We took the project on, knowing that we would have to computerise those cards, check the existing computerised data and draw in data from numerous other datasets. Little did we realise what it would entail and how it would change our lives! We produced a provisional Atlas in 2000, a second one in 2011 and now have maps available online. Although we are still running the scheme, we do want to see it safely transition to a new generation before we become too long in the tooth!
You are both involved in organising and managing the database of the Hoverfly Recording Scheme. Can you tell us a little bit about it and why the scheme is important?
We split responsibility – Stuart manages the database and deals with data import and final validation processes, whilst Roger deals with day-to-day contact with recorders, including verification of iRecord data and active engagement via the UK Hoverflies Facebook group. The dataset now comprises over 1.8 million records and is the largest dataset for an insect group, except for Lepidoptera and Odonata. The size of the dataset, combined with the unique ecological significance that arises from their various larval feeding strategies, makes hoverflies an excellent subject for many lines of research. The most obvious one has been interest in pollinators, but there are growing avenues of interest in hoverflies because they are sensitive to climate change and also because they are often highly habitat specific. Scheme data is also used in the triennial ‘State of Nature’ reporting.
There are 13 additional species included in this updated edition. Where have these ‘new’ species come from?
When we started work on the new edition there was scope to expand the book, but obviously much less scope to completely re-organise its structure. The species chosen were mainly included because experience has shown them to feature among the species whose photos are posted online and, therefore, people want to know about them. One big change we have made has been to make sure that all Eristalis species are covered and that we have a key to assist in their identification.
The third edition includes a new section on putting data to good use. Why was this important for you?
Our objective from the onset has been to produce a book that is somewhat different from a traditional identification guide. We wanted to make sure that readers thought about both the animal they saw and its larval biology. Moreover, we wanted to encourage high-quality recording. Our background in nature conservation has taught us that the biggest impediment to insect conservation is a lack of reliable data. So, we felt it was necessary to show readers how records might be used and what messages they can convey. The use of models to investigate aspects of wildlife biology and conservation is relatively new, so showing readers that data can be used for a lot more than just ‘dots on maps’ is essential if we are to foster an ongoing high-quality recording community.
Traditionally, hoverfly guides use dichotomous keys as the primary aid for identification. What challenges did you face in producing an identification guide based on photographs and why did you feel that a photographic guide was the right choice for this book?
When we originally developed the book, it was not our intention to replace the existing monographs which include full keys, such as British Hoverflies (Stubbs & Falk 2002), Hoverflies of Northwest Europe (van Veen 2010) and the newer Hoverflies of Britain and North-West Europe (Bot & van de Meutter 2023). Our intention was to produce a companion to these books which illustrated the key features using field photos of live flies and close-up shots of specimens to make the identification process more accessible. The huge growth in records coming from photos posted online meant that we especially wanted to target photographers who wish to put a name to the animals in their pictures. Moreover, had we used traditional keys, the book would have been 400+ pages long and would have been considerably more expensive. Britain’s Hoverflies was quite a brave move for WILDGuides at the time because they had not tackled such a large insect family. The design and the contents had to be marketable, appealing and affordable to people who might not normally buy a book on flies. Coming up with guidance that does not involve keys has been a challenge and we must credit Rob Still for the design inspiration and turning our rough ideas into something workable. Since that first edition, the book has evolved and expanded. It is now a lot bigger, but we have held to our basic belief that it should be complimentary to these other works rather than a replacement.
Syritta pipiens – Thick-legged Hoverfly by Nikk, via flickr.
This updated edition includes revised maps, flight-period charts and population trends for hoverfly species across Britain. Have you observed any changes in behaviour or distribution in response to developing environmental challenges? And do we have a clear idea of how these insects are likely to be impacted in the future?
All insects are responding to a plethora of environmental changes, but we are in a better position to investigate the challenges facing hoverflies because there is such a big dataset and new data arrives in volumes that we could only have dreamt of 30 years ago. Some species are expanding their range, while for others the frequency with which they are recorded is diminishing and/or their range is contracting. Species that were once at the edge of their European range have moved northwards, some quite dramatically. Several new species have arrived, apparently under their own steam, as their European ranges have expanded, but others have been assisted by lax biosecurity. A few species have disappeared from south-east England or are in the process of doing so.
It might be assumed that the twin evils of habitat loss and agricultural intensification (including pesticides) are primarily responsible for these changes; however, we think that climate change is having a far more profound impact than is currently accepted. Flies have very thin-skinned larvae and are highly susceptible to changes in humidity, so increases in the frequency and intensity of heatwaves and droughts will have a big impact on them. This sensitivity makes them important indicators – they are arguably climate change canaries that help to explain why so much of Britain’s precious biodiversity is disappearing. Flies are at the bottom of the food chain, so if you lose flies there will be fewer insectivorous birds and mammals, let alone predacious invertebrates such as wasps and spiders.
Hoverflies of Britain and Ireland is published by WILDGuides and is available to pre-order from our online bookstore.
Alongside House Martins and Swallows, Swifts are losing suitable nesting habitat at an alarming rate. Through changes to roof design and structure, nesting sites are becoming increasingly rare. This has contributed to the widespread decline of this species which has seen them added to the UK Red list.
Swifts return to Britain and Ireland from April, following a lengthy flight from Africa. Before leaving in August, Swifts must mate, lay and incubate their eggs. Nest boxes provide Swift colonies with the perfect site to raise their young – boxes should ideally have a large internal cavity with an elongated entrance hole, either at the bottom or downward facing. Swift nest boxes should be placed under the eaves of a building, on walls at least five metres in height. Since these birds nest in colonies, multiple nest boxes or boxes on neighboring houses are ideal for attracting more Swifts.
Here, we look at a selection of nest boxes suitable for Swifts, highlighting the benefits of each design.
Key materials
Wooden nest boxes are preferred by many. This lightweight material is breathable and provides excellent insulation for nesting birds, helping to protect them from temperature extremes between seasons. Typically used for external boxes, harder wood types provide a fair level of robustness and longevity when at least 15mm thick and help to prevent predator access to the nest. The main drawback of wooden nests is the maintenance they require – they should be monitored to ensure the wood remains in good condition, and care taken in choosing wood treatments as many can be harmful to nesting birds.
WoodStone and Woodcrete are almost identical in composition, but Woodcrete is a patented material by Durisol. The material is made from a blend of wood and concrete to produce long-lasting, very durable boxes which can last for decades. It has good insulative properties and creates a thermally stable environment inside the box to shelter inhabitants from extreme temperatures. This material is offered for both built-in and mounted nest boxes but is more often used for built-in boxes due to its weight, which is heavier than wood or eco-plastic. WoodStone is typically more expensive than other materials and requires thoughtful design to improve ventilation to prevent the buildup of moisture in the nest.
Certain components of a bird box may be made with eco-, or regular, plastic. A low-cost option, plastic is more lightweight than Woodcrete, and provides more longevity than wood. This weather resistant material is easy to maintain and is often sourced from recycled plastics. Nest boxes featuring eco-plastic require careful design to mitigate issues with insulation and ventilation. This material is, however, less durable and provides little resistance to predators or extreme temperatures.
This built-in box provides Swifts with a thermally stable, secure nesting space. Woodstone is a durable, long-lasting material that is perfect for new builds.Because it is constructed to standard brick dimensions, this nest box can be rendered over to better blend into constructed walls.
This box provides nesting birds with ample nesting space in a single internal cavity. Woodstone material improves the thermal stability and longevity of the box, while maintaining breathability. This build-in box is also suitable for sparrows, Starlings and other small urban birds.
This built-in box from Unitura is designed to be mounted in eaves and soffits and features a sloped nesting board to allow for mounting at multiple angles. The box has one wood-concrete entrance for extra durability, and a durable plywood box for longevity. This nest box has two nesting bowls to encourage colony nesting.
Designed to be incorporated into new builds or renovated properties, this Swift brick comes in three colours to ensure discreet placement. Constructed from brick, this box will be durable and will last for many years.
Made with insulating concrete, this nesting box provides a long-lasting, discrete, internal nesting space for Swifts. It can last for decades in the right environment. This box can also be bought unfaced, allowing it to be rendered to match the building’s aesthetics.
This robust nest box is constructed entirely of woodstone, ensuring a long-lasting, enduring design and thermal stability throughout the year. A rear entrance provides easy access for cleaning, and a downward facing entrance hole discourages other small garden birds from occupying the nesting space.
This nest box has a single cavity for nesting Swifts and an elongated entrance hole. The wood–concrete material ensures a climactically stable, long-lasting environment for generations of Swifts and a sloped roof ensures adequate drainage.
This robust nest box provides a single compartment for nesting Swifts, with excellent insulation for stability in extreme temperatures. An oval entrance hole and sloping roofs help to exclude Starlings and encourage Swift settlement. Designed to be placed under eaves, the mounting plates and openings are on the sides to allow close-fitting insulation.
Available with left and right-hand side entrances, this box provides nesting Swifts with an underside entrance and landing ramp for easy access. The wood construction is naturally fungal and insect repellent and provides nesting birds with a well-insulated, stable environment.
A hybrid box designed to house both Swifts and bats, the Kiki nesting box provides a thermally-resistant environment suitable for both groups. The compartment that is allocated for Swift nesting has a forward-facing entrance. The durable, long-lasting design can have a lifespan up to 25 years.
Constructed with an upcycled material made from recycled waste insulation, this double-chambered swift box is 100% resistant to moisture and has a long lifespan of up to 25 years. It is lightweight and simple to construct, making it a worthy addition to an existing structure. The excellent thermal properties, and downward-facing entrance, make this an attractive nesting choice for visiting Swifts.
An unobtrusive nest box, the Manthorpe Swift Brick provides nesting birds with a long-lasting, secure nesting site. This nest box is designed to sit inside the insulation cavity of a building, helping to create a thermally stable environment. This brick is available in six colours to blend into existing brickwork.
This droppings board prevents the accumulation of droppings from Swift nest boxes around windows and doors. It can be easily assembled and installed using screws and is suitable for use beneath any nest box.
For more information on bird boxes and how to choose them, find our Buyers Guides here.
Modern infrastructure has come with a host of changes to roof design, which have impacted the availability of suitable nesting sites for a number of avian species. House Martins and Swallows have been particularly affected by these changes, and we can encourage their colonisation, nesting and breeding through the provision of artificial habitats.
These birds live in colonies of around five nests constructed using spring mud, but in drier springs this can be in short supply. Gathering building materials also requires significant energy expenditure for breeding birds, removing energy available for roosting and raising young. Nest boxes provide a ready–made habitat suitable for nesting without spring mud availability.
Swallows and House Martins require a cup or bowl-shaped nest, with a small, narrow entrance and are generally made of Woodcrete/WoodStone or hard wood. They are typically placed under the external eaves of a building to mimic natural nesting locations and are best placed on a sheltered side at a minimum height of 2m above the ground. Due to their natural nesting habits, House Martin and Swallow nests are designed to be wall mounted. These birds are highly sociable and prefer to nest in colonies, so consider mounting multiple nests to further support natural behaviour.
Here we look at a selection of nest boxes suitable for House Martins and Swallows, highlighting the benefits of each design.
Key materials
Wooden nest boxes are preferred by many. This lightweight material is breathable and provides excellent insulation for nesting birds, helping to protect them from temperature extremes between seasons. Typically used for external boxes, harder wood types provide a fair level of robustness and longevity when at least 15mm thick and help to prevent predator access to the nest. The main drawback of wooden nests is the maintenance they require – they should be monitored to ensure the wood remains in good condition, and care taken in choosing wood treatments as many can be harmful to nesting birds.
WoodStone and Woodcrete are almost identical in composition, but Woodcrete is a patented material by Durisol. The material is made from a blend of wood and concrete to produce long-lasting, very durable boxes which can last for decades. It has good insulative properties and creates a stable environment inside the box to shelter inhabitants from extreme temperatures. This material is offered for both built-in and mounted nest boxes but is more often used for built-in boxes due to its weight, which is heavier than wood or eco-plastic. WoodStone is typically more expensive than other materials and requires thoughtful design to improve ventilation to prevent the buildup of moisture in the nest.
Certain components of a bird box may be made with eco-, or regular, plastic. A low-cost option, plastic is more lightweight than Woodcrete, and provides more longevity than wood. This weather resistant material is easy to maintain and is often sourced from recycled plastics. Nest boxes featuring eco-plastic require careful design to mitigate issues with insulation and ventilation. This material is, however, less durable and provides little resistance to predators.
The nest bowl is made from wood concrete, ensuring long-lasting durability and a stable interior climate. The chipboard backing ensures easy, lightweight installation.
A WoodStone nesting box that ensures breathability, durability and temperature stability for nesting House Martins. The exterior grade plywood backing is lightweight making it easy to install, and is hard-wearing to ensure a long-lasting product.
Made with WoodStone, a mixture of FSC certified wood fibres and concrete, this House Martin nest features excellent durability and thermal properties to ensure temperature stability for nesting birds. The backing is also made with WoodStone to increase the durability of the overall unit. Double nest options are also available.
Constructed with Woodcrete, nesting birds will benefit from air permeability and weatherproofing with a low maintenance, long-lasting design. This nest cup is uniquely mounted on a durable backing plate and rails to simplify the installation and cleaning process. Also available in a semi-finished format, allowing House Martins to complete the nest themselves which encourages natural building behaviours.
A ceramic nest bowl mounted on a wooden backing plate. Ceramics provide a breathable nesting area with good thermal properties, whilst providing a plastic-free habitat for breeding birds.
The nest cup is made from a resin-concrete mixture, mounted onto a low-density polyethylene (LDPE) backing plate made from recycled plastic waste. A plastic roof and cup drainage holes ensure a dry nest throughout the season.
Made of a mixture of sawdust and cornstarch, this 3D printed nesting cup is fully biodegradable. The result is a durable, weather resistant habitat that is breathable, with adequate insulation for nesting birds.
This droppings board prevents the accumulation of droppings from Swallow and House Martin nest bowls around windows and doors. It can be quickly and easily assembled and installed using screws and is suitable for use beneath any House Martin or Swallow nest box.
For more information on bird boxes and how to choose them, find our Buyers Guides here.
This book (or rather book series, since it will be more than just one book) has been an incredibly long time in the making, and the sheer scale of the project alone makes it a huge achievement. What were the main challenges you came across and how were they overcome?
Our project began in 1998 when the French publisher Delachaux et Niestlé requested us to create a new feather identification guide based on colour photos. The illustrations of feathers in our Atlas are arranged according to a unique, recognisable pattern on astandardised grey background, each of them depicting the feathers of an individual bird, which allows readers to grasp the essence of different feather types at a glance. We use a method of directly scanning feathers on a flatbed scanner that was developed at the University of Amsterdam. But printing costs were prohibitive. Print-on-demand technology made it possible to produce smaller, more affordable print runs. We used this technology to produce our first collective work of the Feather Research Group titledThe Tail Feathers of the Birds of Central Europe. We also produced two feather calendars with a series of colour plates that were composed for our Atlas of Feathers for Western Palearctic Birds as a test run to see how the colours came out in print.
In 2009, after 10 years of intense work, we produced a DVD with 1,280 colour plates featuring illustrations of feathers for 330 Passerine species. This compilation from many sources resulted in a wave of interest in our project. Meanwhile, the number of Passerine species for which colour plates were ready had nearly doubled to more than 600 species. We decided to publish our collective work under the name The Featherguide rather than any individual names. In this way, everyone in our group can identify with this eponym and no one needs to feel that anyone is adorning themselves with borrowed plumes.
Hansen Feather Template.
The most time-consuming aspect of our work is the composition of feather images for bird species that are not found in any feather collections. Thanks to the kind support of the Feather Identification Laboratory at the Smithsonian Institution, and generous curators at Natural History Museums, it was possible to develop a technique that allows us to extract depictions of isolated feathers from photographs of bird skins. The missing part of the feather that remains in the skin is digitally added in a seamless way. A single colour plate produced in this way from many different puzzle pieces takes up to one week. With 1,350 bird species to be covered in our Atlas and our goal of illustrating all important plumages, you can imagine how many months and years this adds up to. We thank readers for their patience and interest.
Our project has inspired a number of off-shoots that will be welcome by most readers. For example, the French feather identification book by Cloé Fraigneau, which is now available under the titleAn Identification Guide to the Feathers of Western European Birds, emergedfrom the initialplanning sessions we had with the director of Delachaux et Niestlé. The series of books on feather identification by Professor Hans-Heiner Bergmann was inspired by our flyer distributed at the International Ornithological Congress in 2006. A book titled Feathers: Displays of Brilliant Plumage by world–renowned photographer Robert Clark features several photographs of original feather sheets that were mounted for our Atlas of Feathers for Western Palearctic Birds, each depicted on a full double page. Even Audubon Magazine featured a series of photographs of original feather sheets from our Atlas of Feathers for Western Palearctic Birds. The Feather Atlas for North American Birds, published online by the Forensics Laboratory of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, was inspired by our original project description in the Conference Proceedings of the International Bird Strike Committee. The Featherbase website, which gets several million visitors per year, adopted the same grey background colour that we had chosen for our illustrationsand also adopted the idea of depicting wing and tail diagrams in the way that we presented in our original project description.
The study of feathers has an obvious application for species identification, particularly when dealing with bird remains. But can a study of feathers also provide us with an insight into bird evolution and taxonomy, or indeed other areas of research?
Yes, indeed, much can be learned on these topics through the study of feathers. Subtle variations in the phenotype constitute the raw material for natural selection to act upon. Through the study of feathers, we can gain a deeper understanding of evolution. The high amount of phenotypic plasticity in bird wings is a clear example of evolution in progress. Many species exhibit subtle fluctuations in the extent and depth of emarginations on their primaries, resulting in different numbers of slots in their wings between different individuals. Another area of phenotypic plasticity is unusual variations in the number of flight-feathers. Our Feather Research Group compiled a large body of such variations from scientific literature and from our own research.
While feathers were not unique to birds, emarginationsare. Birds as we know them today are thought to have evolved from Mesozoic stem birds that coexisted with feathered dinosaurs. The only line that survived the cataclysmic event on Yucatan 66 million years ago evolved emarginations in their wings. If we consider birds as a class of their own, then the feature that distinguishes birds from feathered dinosaurs is the presence of emarginations. The evolution of emarginations can bring clarity into today’s scientific discussion on the origin of birds, which largely portrays birds as living dinosaurs, thereby blurring the line between reptiles and birds. Emarginations make birds unique. Neither bats nor insects nor pterosaurs have emarginations in their wings. Not all bird families living today have emarginations in their wings, giving rise to the question whether these bird families never evolved emarginations or whether their emarginations disappeared during the course of evolution. Emarginations can be lost either through the evolution of very narrow, pointed wings or through devolution into flightlessness.
Whether our findings have any relevance for taxonomy is up to taxonomists to decide. In the past, taxonomy was entirely based on phenotype, while today it is largely basedon genotype. Phenotypic variations do not play a significant role in current taxonomy, unless one is interested in the possible inheritance of epigenetic switches that regulate the expression of the genotype into the phenotype. For example, it is not clear whether the fine-tuning of the gradient in retinoic acid that is linked to two genes on the sixth and eighth chromosomes (and is responsible for the regulation of the vane width of feathers) was already inherent in the genome of Mesozoic stem birds and was activated through one of these epigenetic switches,giving rise to emarginations in modern birds. This question may be possible to answer by looking at the genome of bird families that appear to have never evolved emarginations so far, such as rails.
Who do you think these books will appeal to and who will benefit from such a comprehensive and high-quality atlas?
Anyone who visits the Featherbase websiteand finds the scans of feathers depicted there to be useful or interesting will also benefit from our work. If only 1% of the millions of visitors to this website see any value of having a printed Atlas with feather images of similar or even higher quality, this will make our Atlas of Feathers for Western Palearctic Birds worthwhile.
Many of the scans shown on the Featherbase website are from the collection of Dr. Wolf-Dieter Busching, the former director of the Naumann Museum in Köthen, Germany, who built up the largest scientific feather collection in the world, comprising feathers of around 2,500 bird species. During the time of the former communist regime in East Germany, it was difficult for Dr. Busching to obtain paper of a consistent colour for mounting the feathers in his collection. Therefore, his feather specimens are mounted on paper of many different colours, sometimes blue, sometimes red, sometimes yellow. Since the vanes of feathers are semi-transparent, the colour of the paper they are mounted on influences the colour of the feathers. In addition, the feathers in Dr. Busching’s collection often overlap each other, thereby hiding parts of the neighbouring feathers. In our Atlas of Feathers for Western Palearctic Birds, we show all feathers on the same standardised grey background and without overlap. In this way, each feather is fully visible and the colours of the feathers can be reliably compared.
Of course, the production of a series of books with high-quality colour plates is more expensive than running a website. The cost of such a series in printed form will limit the number of potential buyers compared to the number of visitors to the Featherbase website. We will keep the cost as low as possible to maximise the number of people able to afford our series in printed form.
The first volume in the series provides readers with a global overview of feather characteristics. Were there any particularly surprising data or revelations that resulted from compiling such a comprehensive collection?
There were several surprises indeed. Two of the most peculiar discoveries, or rather rediscoveries, were made in the families Tityridae (tityras, becards and allies) and in the family Trochilidae (hummingbirds). In the families Tityridae, two genera, Tityra and Pachyramphus, have a small, crippled primary number 9 in between normally-sized neighbours in the wings of adult males, while females and juveniles have normally formed wings. The function of the reduced-sized P9 may be related to sound production (sonation) during the display of adult males, but so far, we could not find any references in the scientific literature that would substantiate such an assumption. Amazingly, this peculiar phenomenon had even escaped the attention of Dr. Wolf-Dieter Busching, who devoted his entire life to the study of feathers, and none of our other collaborators in the Feather Research Group noted this phenomenon.
There are currently three mounted feather specimens of adult males of these two genera on the internet, one of them from the collection of Dr. Busching and two from other feather collections. In each of these three feather collections, the reduced-size P9 was mistakenly glued in front of P10 rather than in its correct position between P8 and P10, indicating that the respective feather researchers had no clue where this feather belongs and seem to have misjudged it to be a reduced outer primary, as is found in many passerines. However, when we consulted an older publication on feathers from 136 years ago, it turns out that this odd, reduced-size feather was already noted by Hans Gadow in 1888, at least in the genus Tityra, while its presence in the genus Pachyramphus seems to have escaped his attention, too.
The second peculiar discovery in the family of hummingbirds concerns the presence of emarginations at the tips of the outer primaries in males of 22 species from five genera. Most of us in the Feather Research Group had assumed by default that none of the hummingbird species have any emarginations, based on our experience with the many species for which we had examined feathers. The great majority of the 377 extant hummingbird species do not have any emarginations, as in the related family of swifts. So, it would have been easy to miss these exceptional few species if the effort had not been made to look at every single hummingbird species based on photographs of live birds. Again, the fact that only males of these exceptional species have emarginations, while females are missing them, leads to the assumption that these emarginations have something to do with the display flight of males. In this case, there is indeed a scientific paper dating back to 1983, which confirms this assumption for just one of the 22 hummingbird species in which males have emarginations. The only feather experts who knew about this study are Professor Lukas Jenni and Dr. Raffael Winkler from Switzerland. The authors of this study found that males create noises with their emarginated primaries and that these noises are used to protect nectar resources. Filling the slot between emarginated primaries with a glue film or clipping the distal 2–3 mm of these primaries caused males to sing more to protect their territories. We can deduce that the other hummingbird species in which males have emarginations use them in a similar way to produce sound. There is, however, a sixth genus of hummingbird in which males have inverse emarginations at the base of the primaries, not at their tips. This phenomenon of emarginations at the feather bases instead of at their tips does not make any aerodynamic sense, so it is likely that these inverse emarginations have some type of ornamental function in males.
These two discoveries, or rather rediscoveries, in the families Tityridae and Trochilidae teach us to remain open and not adhere to preconceived ideas. They also teach us to consult old literature that may have been forgotten or considered outdated.
Hansen Feather Template.
The first volume will initially be published in black and white to make it affordable to as many people as possible. The online database of feathers is also available to everyone in the hopes that citizen scientists and members of the public will help to verify and correct the results. Given that birdwatching is such a popular pastime, do you think that there is a large body of untapped knowledge within the birding public?
There definitely is a large body of untapped knowledge within everyone, not only within the birding community. The key is to allow everyone to express their inner potential themselves. We are in favour of encouraging birders to publish their own data under their own names. Professor Peter Finke, who advises our Feather Research Group, calls this approach of empowering citizens to publish their own data Citizen Science Proper. What has been prevalent so far is Citizen Science Light, in which so-called experts scoop off the knowledge of the public and make a name for themselves with borrowed plumes, so to speak. Professor Finke published a book titled Citizen Science: The Underestimated Knowledge of Laymen (, which answers this question in much greater depth, giving many examples for birdwatchers in particular.
With regards to the global survey of emarginations in all bird species of the world, that became possible on the basis of photographs of live birds, which citizen scientists generously share on the internet. Our approach of opening our research findings on the number of emarginations in all bird species of the world by listing the internet links of the original photos that were used for this study is a way of thanking these many thousands of photographers. They all deserve to be mentioned as co-authors of our study. By sharing our findings and providing the original links to the photos that were used, we offer these photographers a way to give us their feedback on what we discovered thanks to their generosity. Anyone else who likes to share their observations on the photographs of live birds and scans of feathers that were used for our study is also welcome. We greatly value this interaction with birdwatchers and the general public.
How many volumes will the series eventually comprise, and do you know when they are due to be published?
After our last meeting in 2016, the World Feather Atlas Foundation purchased ten large scanners for our Feather Research Group. Five of these scanners went to the Featherbase team to support their endeavour of creating a World Feather Atlas. The remaining five were given to other collaborators in our group. The Featherbase team adopted the same grey background for newly mounted feather specimens as we adopted in 1998 for our Atlas of Feathers for Western Palearctic Birds. This unified the backgrounds on all scans, creating the basis for a potential cooperation to speed up the work on our Atlas of Feathers for Western Palearctic Birds.
The production of colour plates for the passerines took 24 years because they were all produced by only one person. If the work on the colour plates for the non-passerines is divided up by the holders of these ten scanners, it will be possible to produce the remaining colour plates more quickly. At the same time, the holders of these scanners can use them for their own projects.
Most important to us is to respect the copyrights of everyone who produces scans of feathers. Any contributions to our Atlas of Feathers for Western Palearctic Birds must be based on mutual respect for everyone’s free will. Those who contribute scans of feathers are treated at an equal level to those who contribute text. In the past, illustrators of bird guides were often underappreciated compared to the authors. All too often, illustrators were not even mentioned on the book cover. We feel that this relationship between illustrators and authors needs to be amended. Illustrators deserve to be cited alongside authors. In our Atlas of Feathers for Western Palearctic Birds, the work of those who produce scans of feathers is even more important than those who write the texts, because the texts can only be written on the basis of these scans.
The Full Edition of our Atlas of Feathers for Western Palearctic Birds will comprise a total of ten volumes including the introductory volume. Each of the subsequent nine volumes will cover about 150 bird species, adding up to a total of about 1,350 bird species. The Concise Edition will consist of two volumes. . The most precious thing we have to offer are the large-size colour plates in the full edition. The illustrations of feathers in the Concise Edition will be a cut-down version of the original colour plates and considerably smaller.
Atlas of Feathers for Western Palearctic Birds, Volume 1: Introduction is available to pre-order from our online bookstore.
In this review, I am revisiting the spectacular diversity of marine reptiles that flourished in the planet’s oceans and waterways during the time of the dinosaurs. After having gone without popular titles on the subject for almost two decades since Richard Ellis’s Sea Dragons in 2005, suddenly we have three. Last year (April–May) I reviewedThe Princeton Field Guide to Mesozoic Sea Reptiles and Ancient Sea Reptiles, and mentioned that this book was in the works. Ocean Life in the Time of Dinosaurs was originally published in French in 2021 as La Mer au Temps des Dinosaures by Belin/Humensis and has been translated into English by Mark Epstein. Technically speaking that makes it the first of this recent crop, though the English translation was only published in November 2023, after the aforementioned two works. It brings together four French palaeontologists and one natural history illustrator for a graphics-heavy introduction. So, what is in this book, and how does it compare to the other titles?
Ocean Life in the Time of Dinosaurs breaks down into two halves. The obligatory first short chapter introduces the state of the world during the Mesozoic Era 252–66 million years ago (mya), specifically the position of the continents (the palaeogeography) and the various extinction crises by which we divide this time span. After this, the first half is a very long chapter 2 that discusses all the major and minor groups: the “big three” (ichthyosaurs, plesiosaurs, and mosasaurs); the groups with survivors today such as the crocodylomorphs and sea turtles; and lesser-known groups such as hupehsuchians and thalattosaurs. The second half of the book consists of five chronological chapters that help you put all this diversity into some sort of logical order. This starts with life’s first coy attempts at reptiles-returning-to-the-sea in the Palaeozoic Era, the main event of the Mesozoic in three chapters (the Triassic, Jurassic, and Cretaceous), and the Cenozoic Era in which the survivors of the K–Pg extinction continued and sometimes thrived.
The book’s second half stood out to me for two reasons. First, it helps prevent the samerookie mistake that is often maderegarding dinosaurs: they did not all live at the same time. This may sound incredibly obvious and yet is easily andfrequently forgotten. Where marine reptiles are concerned, a good example of this is that the ichthyosaurs evolved ~252 mya and went extinct ~90 mya, while the mosasaurs evolved ~100 mya and went extinct 66 mya at the K–Pg boundary, the two groups thus overlapping for “only” 10 million years. Turtles and crocodylomorphs survived the K–Pg extinction and positively flourished, though some groupssubsequently went extinct and left no living descendants, such as the dryosaurids (a crocodylomorph lineage, extinct ~40 mya). The second reason I liked this chronological section is that it islargely told through the lens of key fossil localities around the globe (here, among others, Monte San Giorgio, Holzmaden, and the Oxford Clay).Though their names are often familiar and each of these deposits offers a unique view of a certain ecosystem at a certain time, they rarely get much attention themselves. The authors here provide just that little bit of extra information on their geography and stratigraphy, the history of their discovery and exploitation, and the palaeoenvironment that can be deduced from them.
Ocean Life in the Time of Dinosaurs is richly illustrated in full colour with photos, diagrams, and paleoart by Alain Bénéteau, including single and double-page spreads. There are several cladograms mapped onto timelines, with the simplified phylogeny of crocodylomorphs on page 69 particularly useful in visualising the uncertain placement ofthalattosuchians. Drawings show unique anatomical adaptations, explaining e.g. the evolution of turtle shells. The text is regularly interspersed with boxes discussing notable species or concepts such as proposed forms of swimming or adaptation of bones to life underwater. In short, the visual presentation of this book is outstanding.
I normally prefer to review each book on its ownmerits, butgiven that we now have two richly illustrated introductory books, there is no avoiding the mosasaur in the room. How does Ocean Life in the Time of Dinosaurs stack up against Darren Naish’s Ancient Sea Reptiles? As I alsoobserve about his Dinopedia, Naish is particularly interested in taxonomy and species diversity. Whereas the discussion of thedifferent groups here takes up 55 pages in chapter 2, Naish does this in 132 pages and six chapters. He goes into more detail on taxonomic conundrums and for most groups discusses more species. What the French quartet here adds are the five chronological chapters, extending their coverage of evolutionary events to before and after the Mesozoic. As mentioned, they also give more detail on key fossil siteswhereas Naish briefly mentions some of these in his chapter 1. My impression is that palaeontology buffs will want to get both books, despite the inevitable overlap. If, however, you are looking to buy just one book then Ocean Life in the Time of Dinosaurs is the most entry-level of the two, whileAncient Sea Reptiles providesmore detail (and in that scenario would be my book of choice). My original observationregarding Greg Paul’s The Princeton Field Guide to Mesozoic Sea Reptiles, that it is more of a reference work to be consulted after either of these books, still holds.
Ocean Life in the Time of Dinosaurs is available from our online bookstore.
Grasshoppers of Britain and Western Europe
Orthoptera and Dermaptera
