Biodiversity Data Journal :
General research article
|
Corresponding author:
Academic editor: Rodolphe Rougerie
Received: 11 Nov 2015 | Accepted: 10 Dec 2015 | Published: 11 Dec 2015
© 2015 John-James Wilson, Shi-Wei Jisming-See, Guo-Jie Brandon-Mong, Aik-Hean Lim, Voon-Ching Lim, Ping-Shin Lee, Kong-Wah Sing
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Wilson J, Jisming-See S, Brandon-Mong G, Lim A, Lim V, Lee P, Sing K (2015) Citizen Science: The First Peninsular Malaysia Butterfly Count. Biodiversity Data Journal 3: e7159. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.3.e7159
|
|
Over the past 50 years, Southeast Asia has suffered the greatest losses of biodiversity of any tropical region in the world. Malaysia is a biodiversity hotspot in the heart of Southeast Asia with roughly the same number of mammal species, three times the number of butterfly species, but only 4% of the land area of Australia. Consequently, in Malaysia, there is an urgent need for biodiversity monitoring and also public engagement with wildlife to raise awareness of biodiversity loss. Citizen science is “on the rise” globally and can make valuable contributions to long-term biodiversity monitoring, but perhaps more importantly, involving the general public in science projects can raise public awareness and promote engagement. Butterflies are often the focus of citizen science projects due to their charisma and familiarity and are particularly valuable “ambassadors” of biodiversity conservation for public outreach.
Here we present the data from our citizen science project, the first “Peninsular Malaysia Butterfly Count”. Participants were asked to go outdoors on June 6, 2015, and (non-lethally) sample butterfly legs for species identification through DNA barcoding. Fifty-seven citizens responded to our adverts and registered to take part in the butterfly count with many registering on behalf of groups. Collectively the participants sampled 220 butterfly legs from 26 mostly urban and suburban sampling localities. These included our university campus, a highschool, several public parks and private residences. On the basis of 192 usable DNA barcodes, 43 species were sampled by the participants. The most sampled species was Appias olferna, followed by Junonia orithya and Zizina otis. Twenty-two species were only sampled once, five were only sampled twice, and four were only sampled three times. Three DNA barcodes could not be assigned species names. The sampled butterflies revealed that widely distributed, cosmopolitan species, often those recently arrived to the peninsula or with documented "invasive" potential, dominated the habitat types sampled by the participants. Data from this first Butterfly Count helps establish a baseline from which we can monitor the patterns and changes in butterfly communities in Peninsular Malaysia.
DNA barcoding, species identification, Barcode Index Numbers, butterflies, citizen science, Malaysia, invasive species
Over the past 50 years, Southeast Asia has suffered the greatest losses of biodiversity of any tropical region in the world (
Comparison of Malaysia and Australia in terms of demography, biogeography, and public engagement with biodiversity.
Country |
Malaysia |
Australia |
Human population |
30,608,552 |
23,849,269 |
Land area (km2)(http://www.data.un.org) |
330,803 |
7,692,024 |
World bank status in 2015 (http://data.worldbank.org) |
Upper-middle-income economy (Vision to be high-income economy by 2020; http://rmk11.epu.gov.my) |
High-income economy |
Internet users in 2014 (http://www.InternetLiveStats.com) |
20,140,125 |
21,176,595 |
Facebook users in 2012 (http://www.InternetLiveStats.com) |
13,589,520 |
11,808.360 |
Butterfly species |
1,182 |
416 ( |
Endangered mammal species in 2015 |
70 |
55 |
National nature societymembers in 2014 |
4,000 (Malaysian Nature Society; http://www.mns.my) |
40,000 (Wilderness Society; http://www.wilderness.org.au) |
Participants in national birdcount in 2014 |
222 |
9,000 |
Citizen science is “on the rise” globally and can make valuable contributions to long-term biodiversity monitoring (
Against the backdrop of these challenges, here we present data and insights from our citizen science project, the first “Peninsular Malaysia Butterfly Count”.
Butterflies are often the focus of citizen science projects (e.g., http://scistarter.com/blog/2012/07/summer-is-busy-season-for-butterflies-and-citizen-scientists; http://www.pierisproject.org) due to their charisma and familiarity and are particularly valuable “ambassadors” of biodiversity conservation for public outreach (http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Education/2014/10/26/The-butterfly-effect/). Butterflies are thought to react rapidly to environmental changes due to their short generation time and high mobility (
This project builds on our experience with another ongoing citizen science project, "The School Butterfly Project", which is reported elsewhere (
As facebook is very popular in Malaysia (Table
Interested citizens could register online, using a Google form (in English and Malay language) linked to the facebook page, or by phone. Registration was closed on May 31, 2015.
Registered citizens were sent (via Pos Laju) a Butterfly Count Pack containing:
i) Butterfly Count Guide (Suppl. material
How to collect butterfly legs for DNA barcoding. The video is also available here https://youtu.be/yebuyCYRZzs.
ii) Ten 1.5ml microcentifuge tubes.
iii) Pair of tweezers.
iv) Butterfly net.
v) Prepaid addressed envelope (Pos Laju).
vi) Souvenir button badges.
Following guidelines in the Butterfly Count Guide (Suppl. material
In September 2015, the national parks board of Singapore (NParks), also conducted an inaugural butterfly count in neighbouring Singapore (https://www.nparks.gov.sg/butterflycount). The NParks program involved a butterfly identification training workshop and assigned participants to a specified count location, requiring a significant commitment (time) and investment (travel costs) by the participants. In contrast, for the Peninsular Malaysia Butterfly Count, in order to reduce costs and encourage participation, we allowed the participants to choose their own count location, and did not provide identification training (although a simple guide to distinguish butterfly families was provided in the Butterfly Count Guide). The participants were asked to collect non-lethal tissue samples (butterfly legs) to enable accurate species identification through DNA barcoding (a DNA barcode reference library for local butterfly species has been generated previously from museum specimens;
Genomic DNA was extracted from butterfly legs using a modified alkaline lysis method whereby legs were digested in 17.5 µl alkaline buffer for 20 minutes before adding 32.5 µl of neutralization buffer (following
Fifty-seven citizens responded to our adverts and registered to take part in the Butterfly Count with 19 registering on behalf of groups, usually families (Fig.
Of the 220 legs received, 192 (87%) generated 'usable' DNA barcodes of varying quality and length. The DNA barcodes and associated collection data are available on BOLD in the publicly accessible datatset - Peninsular Malaysia Butterfly Count [PMBC] (http://www.boldsystems.org/index.php/Public_SearchTerms?query=<PMBC> and dx.doi.org/10.5883/DS-PMBC).
On the basis of 192 usable DNA barcodes, 43 species were sampled by the participants. The most sampled species was Appias olferna (BOLD:AAZ4640), followed by Junonia orithya (BOLD:ABZ6191) (Fig.
Of the 192 usable DNA barcodes, the participants had attempted a family-level identification for 108 (56%) of these butterflies. Based on the DNA barcode assigments, 60% of these family-level identifications were correct (Fig.
The major findings of the Butterfly Count were collated into a newsletter (Suppl. material
In our initial proposal for the Peninsular Malaysia Butterfly Count, our target was to dispatch 100 Butterfly Count Packs. After registration closed we were able to send 57 packs, falling short on this target. Considering that 222 people/groups took part in the sixth annual "Malaysian Garden Bird Watch", the only comparable citizen science project in Malaysia which we are aware of (Table
All of those who registered to take part in the Butterfly Count live on the west coast of Peninsular Malaysia. Furthermore, most of the participants live in the Klang Valley, the large urban agglomeration surrounding Kuala Lumpur (a similar pattern was seen with the Malaysian Garden Bird Watch; http://www.mygardenbirdwatch.com/?cur=bird/search). We need to review how to attract participation from the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia and rural areas, as it was clear we failed to reach out to those communities. Based on the registered names of participants it was also clear we were more successful in attracting participants from Malaysia's ethnic Chinese community than the other ethnic groups represented in Peninsular Malaysia. We were unable to obtain any coverage in Malay language newspapers, which may partially account for this trend, but it also likely reflects the rural-urban divide.
Of the 220 legs received, 192 (87%) generated 'usable' DNA barcodes (i.e., with significant hits on BOLD) of varying quality and length. There are several explanations for the relatively low success rate of PCR and sequencing. As noted above, it took some butterfly legs quite a while to reach us after the count day. Depending on the storage conditions, this could have boosted DNA degradation, which is particularly a problem in hot and humid Malaysia (
A comparison of the DNA barcode identifications and the family-level identifications provided by the participants revealed that the participants were able to correctly identify the family of butterfly specimens 60% of the time. The relatively low success rate suggests that our butterfly family identification guide could undergo some improvement. Preparation of an identification guide represents a trade-off between being "user-friendly" and technical, and it is important not to discourage participants from attempting identifications by providing overly-complex guidelines. The relatively low success of family identifications suggests that asking participants for species identifications would not be very useful, either as a learning experience, or for contributing data on species occurrences. This finding further validates the continued use of the non-lethal DNA barcoding model used for this project.
Although the primary purpose of the Peninsular Malaysia Butterfly Count was to promote awareness and engage the public with biodiversity, the Butterfly Count did produce some ecologically interesting findings.
The most sampled butterfly species was Appias olferna, commonly known as the Striped Albatross. Although most often treated as a distinct species (http://www.nic.funet.fi/pub/sci/bio/life/insecta/lepidoptera/ditrysia/papilionoidea/pieridae/pierinae/appias/index.html), Appias olferna is sometimes considered a subspecies of Appias libythea and DNA barcodes currently named as A. libythea and A. olferna share the same BIN in BOLD (BOLD:AAZ4640). A. olferna shows extreme sexual dimorphism with the male being predominantly white, but the female having broad black stripes on the upperside of the wings. This could potentially explain some of the family-level misidentifications by the participants, as our guide relied heavily on wing colour. According to Corbet and Pendlebury (
The second most sampled species was Junonia orithya, the Blue Pansy (BOLD:ABZ6191), which has a distribution covering Central Asia, India, Southeast Asia, southern China, Taiwan, Australia, and Africa (
1) The level of participation in the first Peninsular Malaysia Butterfly Count was encouraging, but reaching and engaging rural communities remains a challenge.
2) The non-lethal DNA barcoding approach for species identification worked effectively, however, protocols could be improved to limit the number of returned samples which could not be identified. The family-level identification guide could use some improvement but provides an important educational tool for the participants.
3) The sampled butterflies revealed that widely distributed, cosmopolitan species, often recently arrived to the peninsula or with documented "invasive" potential, dominate the habitats sampled by the participants. Data from the first Butterfly Count helps establish a baseline from which we can monitor changes in butterfly communities in Peninsular Malaysia.
The citizen scientists - Huwa Yean Yin, Chia Chue Hon, Lai Sook Ling, Lee Soon Teck, Lee Sze Ying, Lee Chia Hao, Lee Chia Hsien, Lee Chia Sheng, Lee Shin Yee, Nor Azni Abdullah, Kerk Kim Lian, Julie Khoo, Alexandra Zieritz, Koo Si Hui, Noraina binti Jamal Rashid, Chong Yen Chin, Sean Vooi, Leong Sum Yee, Yu Cheng Swan, Sofwan bin Badruddin, Koo Si Hui, See Li Lian, Lilianne Yu, Soo Said Chyn, Chai Shut Kee, Chin Ah Yim, Ting Yun Yee, Lee See Mun, Muna Najihah binti Hj. Mokhtarruddin, Ng Yean Wah, Lee Qian Hui, Lee Jin Ming, Ma Bao Yi, Zaira Jane, Hanna, Azam, Joyce Lean, Ryan Teoh, Dylan Teoh, Leong Kai Jie, Lee Wai Yee, Lee Wai Kuan, Sei Hwui Tan, Chen Siew Ping, Nurzuhaila binti Jamaludin, Salman, Salahuddin, Saad, Mdm. Goh, Gerald Lee Zheng Yang, Innes Lee Jia Hui, Teo Yew Guan, Students from Senior Three Science – Chinese High School Batu Pahat Johor, Ng Mei Eng, Pang Chee Yee, Pang Chee Kok, Hew Lee Yoon, Gan Hui Hui, Ng Say Chong and three friends, Ting Mei Ying, Mr. Ong, David Foon, Phoebe Wong Sau May and family, See Sow Pang, Ernest Tang Onn Sheng, Eddie Tang Gwo Huei, Lai Yik Chuen, Virgo Tjan, Ng Zhi Yu with Mother, and Elder Brother, lam Panny with Bapa, Ibu, Kakak and Adik, Hannah Muhammad Akram, Maryam, Hasan, Narong Jaturas, Emily Lim, "Reptilia Kingdom", Chu Bah Boh, Crystal Sophillea Alexander, Clarence Gabriel Alexander.
The team at BOLD for their database support.
The journalists for promoting our project.
The helpful and supportive staff at UMCares.
JJW and KWS devised the project. All authors were involved in the implementation and administration of the project. SWJS, GJBM and KWS performed the labwork. JJW, SWJS, GJBM and AHL analysed the data. JJW wrote the manuscript with input from all the authors.