I recently got myself a stereo microscope. It had a 10x eyepiece and can view at 10X or 30X magnification. I added a 20X eyepiece that allows 20X or 60X magnification.
What could I use this device for in relation to iNaturalist?
My current thoughts:
–Mosses (and liverworts), especially cell structures. Unfortunately in a few cases identification structures may require a bit more than 60X.
–Live insects or other bugs (such as springtails and arachnids). If an insect is cooled in the fridge and/or provided with food, it be appropriate for microscopes. A glass cuvette might be good to contain the insect and provide a good image (if you not providing food).
–Ants. A lot of identification features require more than my OM TG6 is capable of resolving. Since ants in a colony are abundant in most cases killing one individual for microscopy isn’t a big deal.
–Bees. Lot of bees species are hard with a microscope (or at least cooling).
–Vinegar flies. Abundant and tiny around compost.
–Separation of the Northern and Vernal bluet species of damselflies and many species of female damselflies (checking out mesostigmal plates).
–Microscopic creatures found in water or wet environments. I hear its better to include a bit of the substrate such as mud. Most of this stuff would be better with a compound microscope, but the bigger stuff might be possible and achieve coarse ID.
–Species of insects that require examining internal genitalia. No choice, must kill insects to do this.
Unfortunately, spores of lichens and fungi require a compound microscope, sometimes even with oil immersion optics.
You covered most of the options, although it would be more suited to some of those than others. I know them as dissecting scopes and have used them to identify bryophytes and lichens.
There are many, many features of flowering plants that are best seen with a dissecting scope: types of hairs, and details of flowers and seeds, in particular. Also contents of plant galls.
Please post a photo of a tiny insect taken at your highest magnification. What a scope is good for depends a lot on what the smallest features you can see clearly are.
I use a dissecting microscope (seems to be the same as a stereo microscope) routinely to look at small parts of plants – spikelets of grasses, hairs on leaves or stems, structures in flower heads of Composites, you name it. Also to get tiny sliver out of my skin. So many uses. Better than a hand lens because higher magnification and more stable. (But not suitable to taking to field, unfortunately.)
Nearly any insect that you have in the hand could be photographed this way. Even if it’s identifiable from other photos, close ups of hard to see areas like the mandibles or the underside can always help improve on the suite of photos available in Inat for a specific species.
Many plants require close up photos of certain structures, often not known until you look at the key that separates them from other species.
iNat is lacking in good identifiable photos of very small things, so I would probably focus on those things.
I often reckon that my dissecting /stereo microscope is the best $2000 I ever spent! I bought it about 10 years ago - a Leica EZ4. I routinely use it for botanical purposes: iding eudicots, sedges and grasses mainly. I also take quite acceptable photographs with my Olympus Tough camera looking down through the eyepiece. See the second photo here as an example: https://inaturalist.ala.org.au/observations/263242075.
Sometimes I get better photos than at other times.
I like to add photos like this to my observations to show diagnostic details.
Like Barbara above, my microscope is also highly valued for helping me ease thorns out of my fingers.
Lighting is very important. I find the LED lights are too bright to show details of, for example, beetle elytra punctures and I wish I could get back to the old 60 watt hot bulbs.
I often get better results when photographing insects in 70% alcohol (the usual preservative). as there are no highlights under the liquid. But colours are often different when the specimen is wet so you need to take that into account in your identification and best to mention it on iNaturalist. I recommend you get a solid watchglass for photographing in liquid.
It can be better to take the photograph with the microscope at low magnification and then zoom in on the photo rather than set the microscope to maximum magnification where the depth of field will be narrower.
My friend found a used one for about $31 Canadian which I bought off him. It is a old Cenco 62090-2 model. I added a ring light for about $40 and a pair of 20X Amscope eyepieces for about $100 Canadian. There is an issue with the ring light. I will use double-sided tape and a rubber band to ensure it stays in place. Without it tightening the screws on the ring light just makes it slide down. I also have a 3D printed holder my brother in law printed off which I slightly modified to make taking photos with my Olympus TG6 camera easier. The scope performs well (it weighs close to 10 pounds) but I do need to do some light cleaning of the optics.
One photo is what my TG6 camera can achieve with its ring light and a hand held focus stack. The other two are from the microscope at 60X with one picture more zoomed in. Unfortunately I just found out that my 20X eyepiece is at one point slightly wider than the camera holder my brother-in-law printed out so I have to manually hold up the camera to the eyepiece. Thus I can’t get the image as focused as the viewfinder shows likely due to hand shake or slight changes the auto focus does.
The ring light for my microscope is dimmable, but I can see cases where a light from other angles could be useful.
Also, although it’s a bit a work, manual focus bracketing can be done at higher magnifications. If your camera can do it set it up for interval shooting. Have it take about 30 or more photos every three seconds and make sure the camera is making a noise when it is taking a shot. Adjust the focus in between each shot. After taking the shots combine the photos together with a program such as Picolay and remember it check the align option. The align option compensates for getting closer to the specimen as you change the focus. Also the camera needs to be in a holder aligned with the eyepiece and have a short delay before the first shot is taken so your hands don’t touch the camera while the pictures are being taken.
Thanks very much but that is way outside my capabilities. The illumination isn’t part of the microscope. It is basically an expensive desk lamp. The camera is very basic and I just hold it against the eyepiece lightly enough to not alter the focus. I have tried grease-proof paper as a diffuser then I bought a diffuser made specifically for the lamp but neither had any effect on the high-lights reflecting off the specimen. Working under liquid seems my best option.
iNaturalist helped me to get a grant for a stereo microscope. True story. Brand new, £500, 90x zoom stereo microscope for free because iNat transfers all my research grade obs over to the local recording centre. They want more records from me and are willing to equip me to improve my recording. I’m in the same position now where I need to justify the grant and work out the best way to use it.
I’ve found a great way to quickly check some insects is to pop them into a ziploc bag and use that to hold them in place. You can check them top and bottom without killing them and without them being able to move or flip over. Great for genitalia checks on millipedes. Sadly the bag reduces the photo quality a bit.
My stereoscope has a built in light/battery and I regularly just take it into the field to inspect organisms. My latest fascination has been springtails and 20x-40x is perfect for a lot of rough ID, though I find that many can be taken to species too! I also use it to identify mosquito larvae and other aquatic insects at various life stages.
The microscope has built in dimmable halogen lights on top and bottom. It has replaceable discs for the stage: a plastic one with white and black sides, and a frosted glass one for using with the bottom light. I usually use just the top light and use my desk lamp and/or flashlights if I need additional light. I use a remote for my camera to avoid blur from any wiggliness in my microscope/camera setup. I bought some borosilicate glass dishes to avoid scratching the plastic viewing area with my tweezers and to make it easier to move tiny insects into view.
Although possibly covered by your water organisms comment, I suggest investigating the algae species in different bodies of water. The variety is amazing! I did some algae research with my high school biology teacher & have always wanted to continue it.
