Ash, A. | Search bioRxiv

bioRxiv2026

Testing the efficacy of artificial flowers as a novel attractant for automated pollinator monitoring

Insect camera traps are a rapidly developing technology, enabling automated monitoring of insects. However, little has been reported on improving the attractants used for daytime flying insects on such cameras. This study compares the attractiveness of novel, 3D printed, artificial flowers with traditional methods of attracting insects (e.g. pan traps and solid coloured paper squares). We hypothesised that artificial flowers would attract a higher abundance and diversity of insects compared to traditional attractants by more accurately mimicking flowers. Additionally, we examined colour preference and average landing duration on the attractants. Artificial flowers, dry pan traps and paper squares, painted in yellow, white, or blue ultraviolet fluorescent paint, were filmed simultaneously to observe wild insect behavioural responses (landings and approaches). The results indicate overall preference for artificial flowers over the two traditional attractants when considering all insect groups together, and overall colour preferences for blue and yellow. When analysing insect groups separately, hoverflies preferred landing on artificial flowers over the other attractants. Bumblebees preferred approaching artificial flowers, and small insects preferred landing and approaching artificial flowers over the other attractants. Other flies preferred landing on pan traps and paper over artificial flowers. Hoverflies, small insects, wasps, and solitary bees responded more to yellow than the other colours, while bumblebees responded more to blue. Comparisons of landing durations revealed that hoverflies spent longer on the artificial flowers than paper. Other flies spent longer on the pan traps and paper. These results show that artificial flowers could offer an efficient attractant for insect camera traps as they attracted a higher abundance of key pollinating insects (hoverflies and bumblebees), and do not have worse attraction rates for the other insect groups (excluding other flies).

ecology↗

bioRxiv2017

The Genomic History Of Southeastern Europe

Farming was first introduced to southeastern Europe in the mid-7th millennium BCE - brought by migrants from Anatolia who settled in the region before spreading throughout Europe. To clarify the dynamics of the interaction between the first farmers and indigenous hunter-gatherers where they first met, we analyze genome-wide ancient DNA data from 223 individuals who lived in southeastern Europe and surrounding regions between 12,000 and 500 BCE. We document previously uncharacterized genetic structure, showing a West-East cline of ancestry in hunter-gatherers, and show that some Aegean farmers had ancestry from a different lineage than the northwestern Anatolian lineage that formed the overwhelming ancestry of other European farmers. We show that the first farmers of northern and western Europe passed through southeastern Europe with limited admixture with local hunter-gatherers, but that some groups mixed extensively, with relatively sex-balanced admixture compared to the male-biased hunter-gatherer admixture that prevailed later in the North and West. Southeastern Europe continued to be a nexus between East and West after farming arrived, with intermittent genetic contact from the Steppe up to 2,000 years before the migration that replaced much of northern Europes population.

genetics↗