Assessing the value of the Garden Moth Scheme citizen science dataset: how does light trap type affect catch? Adam J. Bates 1 *, Jon P. Sadler 1 , Glyn Everett 2 , Dave Grundy 3 , Norman Lowe 3 , George Davis 3 , David Baker 3 , Malcolm Bridge 3 , Jon Clifton 3 , Roger Freestone 3 , David Gardner 3 , Chris Gibson 3 , Robin Hemming 3 , Stephen Howarth 3 , Steve Orridge 3 , Mark Shaw 3 , Tom Tams 3 & Heather Young 3 1 The University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK, 2 University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK, and 3 The Garden Moth Scheme, Birmingham, UK Accepted: 6 December 2012 Key words: actinic bulb, community science, Heath trap, Lepidoptera, mercury vapour bulb, moth sampling, Open Air Laboratories, Robinson trap, scientific literacy, Skinner trap, voluntary biological monitoring Abstract Done well, citizen science projects can gather datasets of a size and scope far larger than would be pos- sible using professional researchers. This study uses data gathered in Britain by the Garden Moth Scheme (GMS). Participants run garden light traps for at least 26 weeks a year and complete garden questionnaires detailing garden habitat and nearby landscape features. We used data exploration and generalised linear modelling (GLM) to investigate whether the data can be used to generate reliable research findings, testing the effect of moth light trap type on moth catch. Robinson traps, then Skinner traps, then Heath traps were found to catch the highest abundance and diversity of moths. Mercury vapour bulbs, then blended light bulbs, then actinic bulbs collected the highest abundance and diversity of moths. The GMS dataset can be used to generate useful and reliable research findings, and can be used in the future to investigate temporal and spatial trends in moth assemblage. Under international law, the use of mercury vapour bulbs will be phased out in coming years, leading to changes in the way moth assemblages are sampled. Information on the relative efficacy of different bulb types will aid the analysis of long-term moth datasets after these changes. Introduction ‘Citizen science’ is not a new phenomenon, with various accounts tracing its origins back to the Audubon Christ- mas Bird Count of 1 900 (Seattle Audubon Society, 2011), or the American Ornithologist Union’s migratory bird lighthouse deaths surveys some 20 years earlier (Bonney et al., 2009). It has been implemented in less familiar forms for more than a millennium (Miller-Rushing et al., 2012). However, the abundance and scope of citizen science projects is burgeoning (Silvertown, 2009; Miller- Rushing et al., 2012), with some projects enjoying the participation of tens to hundreds of thousands of people (e.g., Cannon et al., 2005; Lintott et al., 2011). The participation of citizens in gathering data for scientific research is increasingly regarded as essential, because communities can gather data across scales of space, time, and numbers of observations that would be unimaginable using only professional scientists (Cohn, 2008; Silver- town, 2009; Miller-Rushing et al., 2012). Engagement with citizen science can also educate and enthuse partici- pants about science, so raising their scientific literacy and environmental awareness (Cohn, 2008; Bonney et al., 2009). In 2007, the Open Air Laboratories (OPAL) project (OPAL, 2012) began in England using a range of regional partners based at UK universities (Silvertown, 2009; Davies et al., 2011). The project aimed to enhance com- munity understanding and enjoyment of the local natural environment, particularly through community participa- tion in environmental science investigations. An impor- tant project component aimed to support natural history societies and recording groups. OPAL in the West *Correspondence: Adam J. Bates, School of Geography, Earth & Environmental Sciences, The University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK. E-mail: a.j.bates@bham.ac.uk © 2013 The Authors Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 146: 386–397, 2013 Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata © 2013 The Netherlands Entomological Society 386 DOI: 10.1111/eea.12038