[HN Gopher] Bugs Matter: counting insect 'splats' on vehicle num...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Bugs Matter: counting insect 'splats' on vehicle number plates
       [pdf]
        
       Author : Kaibeezy
       Score  : 74 points
       Date   : 2022-05-05 07:38 UTC (15 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (cdn.buglife.org.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (cdn.buglife.org.uk)
        
       | calebegg wrote:
       | See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windshield_phenomenon
        
       | Wistar wrote:
       | It used to be--80s and early 90s--that a couple hundred mile
       | drive down the Oregon coast would need at least one or two stops
       | for bug splat removal. I made that drive last July and there were
       | perhaps two splats for the entire 400-mile round trip.
        
         | moron4hire wrote:
         | I remember being at minor league baseball games in the 90s,
         | waiting for dark to see fireworks after the game, and getting
         | absolutely rained on by moths falling from getting cooked in
         | the stadium lights. The cloud of moths would be so thick it
         | would partially obscure the lights. The girls would scream and
         | the boys would scoop up handfuls from the ground to throw at
         | the girls.
         | 
         | ... Not me. Other boys.
         | 
         | Anyway. I don't think the mosquitoes got the memo. I feel like
         | I get more and more bites every year.
        
         | dvh wrote:
         | '80s cars are not exactly known for their aerodynamics...
         | _____          ___/__|__\__         [   \__|__/  ]         '(
         | )------( )=
        
           | PheonixPharts wrote:
           | This is the classic "this is fine" response whenever someone
           | posts this observation about declining insect populations and
           | cleaning dead bugs off of cars.
           | 
           | However a _tiny_ bit of investigation into this will lead you
           | to realize that this hypothesis is false.
           | 
           | More than just being false, research has discovered that
           | modern cars hit _more_ insects than less aerodynamic cars
           | [0]:
           | 
           | > The research included vintage cars up to 70 years old to
           | see if their less aerodynamic shape meant they killed more
           | bugs, but it found that modern cars actually hit slightly
           | more insects.
           | 
           | So, given what research has shown us, we should expect there
           | to be _more_ insects observed if it were the case that insect
           | populations remained stable while cars became more
           | aerodynamic.
           | 
           | 0. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/12/car-
           | spla...
        
             | jgraham wrote:
             | Right, the quote from the linked paper is:
             | 
             | > This is contrary to a suggestion that finding fewer
             | insects on number plates in recent years might be
             | attributed to increasing streamlining of vehicle
             | aerodynamics over time. Our data show that newer vehicles
             | sample more insects than older vehicles, and we have
             | observed pattern of fewer insects on number plates more
             | recently than in the past in spite of this effect of
             | vehicle age, which is assumed to be correlated with
             | aerodynamics.
             | 
             | In fact the researchers posit a few more possiblities other
             | than collapse of insect populations that could explain
             | their data. For example they can't eliminate the
             | possibility that there's some change in the management of
             | roadside verges that specifically decreases the insect
             | population in those environments, without reducing the
             | population in other environments.
             | 
             | The challenge for all the explainations which involve
             | something other than population change is that there's now
             | an increasing nubmer of studies using different techniques
             | which consistently show declining populations. For example
             | [1] uses Malaise traps in nature reserves, which presumably
             | wouldn't be affected by roadside management practices, and
             | finds a ~75% decrese in flying insect biomass over 27
             | years, whereas [2] uses light trap data to look at moths
             | specifically and finds a ~40% decline in biomass over 50
             | years (and ~50% in woodlands).
             | 
             | Whilst it's possible to find studies that show increases in
             | insect numbers e.g. as a result of site-specific
             | conservation work, there's a lot of data suggesting that in
             | Europe at least numbers are in significant decline. As far
             | as I can tell (and I'm really not an expert) we don't
             | understand the reasons all that well, but habitat
             | fragmentation and pesticide use are leading theories. We at
             | least know that common pesticides (notably, but not
             | exclusively, neonicotinoids) are toxic to bees, and will
             | reduce populations even at sub-lethal doses (e.g. [3]). So
             | changing our agricultral practices to eliminate these
             | chemicals looks like a necessary, but perhaps not
             | sufficient, part of the solution.
             | 
             | [1] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/jo
             | urnal... [2] https://resjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/do
             | i/10.1111/icad... [3] https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc
             | /download?doi=10.1.1.66...
        
             | gonzo wrote:
             | Not if the aerodynamic cars from a decade ago significantly
             | impacted insect populations.
        
               | Kaibeezy wrote:
               | _Less than half of 1% of the land area in the United
               | States is covered by roads of all kinds, not including
               | rights-of-way, parking lots, and driveways._
               | 
               | National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
               | Medicine. 2005. _Assessing and Managing the Ecological
               | Impacts of Paved Roads._ Washington, DC: The National
               | Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11535.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | There is every reason to expect that the flying insects
               | near paved roads today are less likely to die in
               | encounters with cars than the flying insects near roads
               | of 40 years ago.
               | 
               | But it would be very difficult to measure that effect.
        
           | Wistar wrote:
           | Last summer's trip was in a Mercedes GLK, not exactly the
           | paragon of slipperiness.
        
           | Steltek wrote:
           | The majority of US cars are huge SUVs and pickup trucks. I
           | would dare say 80's cars are more aerodynamic simply by
           | having a smaller cross section.
        
             | drewzero1 wrote:
             | Not necessarily. Windshields were less curved and more
             | vertical, body panels were much less contoured, and
             | features like sealed-beam headlights, mirrors (if
             | equipped), and windshield wipers were more protuberant. A
             | 1980s Mercury Grand Marquis had a drag coefficient of 0.46,
             | while a 2018 Ram 1500 is listed at 0.357 (less is better).
             | Obviously some 80s cars fared better, mostly compacts like
             | my '83 SAAB 900 (3.7, not on the list below) or sports
             | cars. I just picked the Mercury as a typical full-sized
             | family sedan.
             | 
             | Here's a big list, for anyone interested in some numbers:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient
        
               | wtallis wrote:
               | Coefficient of drag normalizes relative to cross
               | sectional area. Pointing out that a modern Ram 1500 has a
               | lower Cd than an old Mercury doesn't mean the Ram has
               | less drag. If the Ram's cross sectional area is 30%
               | larger, it will have more drag than the Mercury despite
               | having a more aerodynamic shape.
        
               | drewzero1 wrote:
               | Thanks for pointing this out; I was unaware. There's also
               | a table of cross-sections later in the linked Wikipedia
               | page, but I hadn't paid much attention to it because of
               | not knowing how to perform a meaningful comparison.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | narag wrote:
           | There's this assumption, not explicit, but floating around
           | this thread, that aerodynamics somehow makes splats more
           | difficult.
           | 
           | I can't really refute it, but it doesn't ring true to me
           | either.
           | 
           | Insects don't even touch the car before exploding, mind you.
        
           | zevv wrote:
           | I have been driving the exact car from this drawing for the
           | last 25 years: Volvo 940, square as a brick.
           | 
           | In the 90s, it needed a weekly scrub to keep the headlights
           | and plate visible.
           | 
           | I have literally not washed my car a single time over the
           | last year. It has moss and pollen all over, but there are
           | hardly any bug splats.
           | 
           | This frightens me _so_ very much.
        
           | ErikVandeWater wrote:
           | Somewhat off topic - Did you draw that car yourself, or did
           | you copy it from somewhere? It's great!
        
           | gerdesj wrote:
           | The article's title specifically mentions "number plates".
           | All cars in the UK are required to display number plates
           | (license plates) at the front and back. They have a standard
           | size. They are nearly all (99% or more) in the centre and are
           | roughly the same height off the ground, depending on model.
           | 
           | My first Mark 1 Ford Fiesta from 198something had its plate
           | at about the same place as the Honda S2000 I had in
           | 200something and the Renault CLio I have now and the Ford
           | Transit van I also drive.
           | 
           | The S2000 did the best doughnuts though. Rear wheel drive,
           | variable valves, 13,500 RPM red line and quite a lot of
           | welly.
        
         | brimble wrote:
         | This was the case in the Midwest in our basically-the-same-
         | shape-as-modern-cars 90s family cars. We'd use the windshield
         | cleaner thing next to the gas pump nearly every time we
         | stopped, when on road trips, and for good reason--there'd be a
         | few large splatters and a bunch of smaller ones, every time.
         | And that's if it wasn't particularly buggy out that day--there
         | were some times we stopped _for the windshield_ , not for gas.
         | 
         | I think I've done that like... four or five times, total, since
         | the year 2000. And I think every time it was for a _single_ big
         | bug-splatter.
         | 
         | [EDIT] I also recall there being _tens_ of times more large
         | insects--butterflies, large moths, grasshoppers, katydids--
         | around _in general_ back in the late 80s and early 90s, even in
         | the  'burbs, like they were just all over the place in the
         | Spring and Summer, you'd walk through lawn-length grass at the
         | school playground and tons of them would be all around you,
         | hopping away or taking to the air, and now I have to try pretty
         | hard to find even one... but surely that can't be right, can
         | it? That'd be _super_ noticeable by scientists who track that
         | kind of thing. Right?
        
           | throwaway894345 wrote:
           | I've been driving all over the midwest and my car is covered
           | in splats after each trip. This seems really surprising to
           | me.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | Gys wrote:
       | A 26 page research report with a clear conclusion:
       | 
       | > The results show that the number of insects sampled on vehicle
       | number plates in the UK decreased by 58.5% between 2004 and 2021,
       | and that these differences were statistically significant. A
       | comparison of the 2004 national data with the 2019 data from Kent
       | showed a 53.7% decrease. The greatest decreases in splat rate
       | between 2004 and 2021 occurred in England (65%) whilst journeys
       | in Scotland recorded a comparably smaller decrease (27.9%), with
       | intermediate decreases in Wales (55%).
        
         | qiskit wrote:
         | It could be evolution - insects with traits that kept them from
         | cars were selected for. Perhaps changes to the license plates?
         | Changes in the design of cars? Or a general decline of insect
         | population?
        
           | markburns wrote:
           | Completely anecdotal but I seem to remember flies banging
           | their heads on windows a lot more when I was younger.
           | 
           | Now they seem to be able to navigate their way out with
           | comparative ease. Open a door or window and waft them in the
           | general direction and they seem to be able to escape.
           | 
           | I've been wondering for a few years if this was evolution.
        
             | brewdad wrote:
             | I've had two birds fly into my living room window this
             | week. I haven't even cleaned it recently. The flies may be
             | evolving but robins have a ways to go yet.
        
             | sigmoid10 wrote:
             | Please tell me where you live so I can move there. My flies
             | are as dumb as ever, I can't even get them to go out the
             | window with me actively trying to kill them. They rather
             | take their chances with the swatter or get tangled behind
             | the curtains.
        
               | markburns wrote:
               | The UK. Maybe you stress them out :)
        
               | sigmoid10 wrote:
               | From an evolutionary perspective it would seem wrong to
               | actively go towards the source of stress when the
               | opposite direction clearly leads to safety. But then
               | again what do I know. Perhaps my flies are adrenaline
               | junkies.
        
           | yreg wrote:
           | The more aerodynamic the car is the less splats there should
           | be, as the bugs are more likely to be carried by the flow of
           | air around the car, correct?
           | 
           | Still, there is no doubt that the insect population is in a
           | massive decline.
        
             | PheonixPharts wrote:
             | > The more aerodynamic the car is the less splats there
             | should be, as the bugs are more likely to be carried by the
             | flow of air around the car, correct?
             | 
             |  _incorrect_
             | 
             | As I've pointed out in another comment, research has shown
             | [0] that counter-intuitively "modern cars actually hit
             | slightly more insects."
             | 
             | It's a reasonable hypothesis, however what this research
             | shows is that we would have expected to see _more_ dead
             | insects on cars had populations remained stable.
             | 
             | 0. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/12/car-
             | spla...
        
               | meetups323 wrote:
               | Research is research, but anecdotes are anecdotes. And
               | anecdotally, I can tell you that having done the same
               | drive in the same conditions many times with both a Jeep
               | Wrangler and a Toyota Prius, the Wrangler consistently
               | has _far_ more bugs on it, and requires multiple
               | cleanings per leg of the journey. The Prius requires no
               | cleanings for the duration of the trip.
        
             | throwaway0a5e wrote:
             | >The more aerodynamic the car is the less splats there
             | should be, as the bugs are more likely to be carried by the
             | flow of air around the car, correct?
             | 
             | It depends on what the nature of the airflow around a
             | specific car looks like. Bugs have a harder time than air
             | making a "hard corner" but the mass of air stuck at a hard
             | corner can cause other air to go around in a more graceful
             | way and carry the bugs with them.
             | 
             | Coefficient of drag hasn't improved much since the 90s and
             | most of those improvements have been with regard to the
             | vacuum behind the car so aerodynamics is probably only a
             | contributing factor either way.
        
           | yCombLinks wrote:
           | Yes, it could be that, but anecdotally I see significantly
           | less bugs on cars during summers than during my childhood.
           | The grill, windshield, etc would have dozens of lovebugs
           | after a short drive on an early summer day. Now they're rare.
        
           | mikestew wrote:
           | I've worn the same brand and model of motorcycle helmet
           | (Nolan flip-up) for probably 20 years. Granted, I'm sure
           | Nolan has made some minor changes over the years, but the
           | aerodynamics of my massive noggin haven't changed, and I
           | clean far, _far_ fewer bugs off my face shield than in years
           | past. Just my imagination? No, I have records of when I buy
           | Honda Spray Cleaner and Polish (the pro 's choice for
           | cleaning face shields), and I don't buy as much as I used to
           | for the same miles ridden. And old post of mine from six
           | months ago when the topic came up, and everyone's all like
           | "cars are more aerodynamic than they used to be" (yeah, well,
           | my head's not), basically saying the same thing:
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29006969
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | ISL wrote:
       | If the (important/compelling/disturbing) science content wasn't
       | enough, definitely open the article for terms like "Splatometer"
       | and "Splats-per-mile".
        
       | stelonix wrote:
       | Could this in any way be related to the increase of wifi,
       | cellular or any other EM waves that got a huge boom since the
       | early 2000s? I ask this as in, is there any research on how the
       | EM waves we've been using the past 20-25 years interact with
       | arthropoda in general?
        
         | jl6 wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_in_insect_populations
         | 
         | There are a lot of very plausible explanations to work through
         | before you have to consider something exotic like EM
         | sensitivity.
        
         | malfist wrote:
         | Probably going to regret asking this, but is there any evidence
         | that EM waves interact negatively in anything in the animal
         | kingdom? Outside of literally cooking something.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-05-05 23:01 UTC)