I’ve noticed a couple of similar threads on the forum, but none that quite answer what I’m curious about. I’ve been spending a lot of time photographing springtails and other microfauna, and I’ve reached the point where I know some of them just aren’t going to be identifiable without a microscope. I’d like to get one mainly for identification purposes, so I can look at the smaller anatomical details that don’t come through in photos alone.
What I’m not sure about is what kind of microscope would be most useful for this. There seem to be different options, like stereo or dissecting microscopes versus compound ones, and I’m not clear on which is better suited for insects and springtails. I also don’t know what sort of magnification range is really necessary, or whether lighting and camera attachments make a big difference for people who are actually using them for this kind of work.
If anyone has experience with a particular setup that works well for springtails or other small arthropods, I’d love to hear what you’re using and what works for you. I don’t need anything super high-end, just something that makes identifications more reliable and lets me see features that the naked eye and macro photos miss. Thx in advance!
Looking to upgrade myself eventually! While I can’t really recommend a specific model, probably a compound microscope would work fine. Probably need at least up to 1000x magnification. What is arguably just as important is to properly mount and clear the specimen. This would require Isopropyl alcohol (70%) for collecting, which is really cheap to get and found any a lot of places. For clearing the pigment, you could use Sodium Hydroxide or Lactic acid. The latter takes longer to clear, but is much safer if it accidentally spills on you. And also would probably need some concave slides (flat slides make it easier to crush the specimen) and some coverslips. Good luck!
3 Likes
Oh, and I would probably recommend asking Pete Lypkie (https://www.inaturalist.org/people/doviende) and James Hussey (https://www.inaturalist.org/people/sgtbird08) for advice, who are much more knowledgeable when it comes to microscopy (or springtails in general, lol).
3 Likes
Thx I might reach out! :)
Oh nice, that’s really helpful. I hadn’t really thought about the mounting and clearing side of things — I’ve just been focused on figuring out what kind of scope I even need. Good tip about lactic acid too; that sounds a lot less sketchy to work with than some of the other stuff I’ve seen mentioned. I’ll probably start with a compound scope and experiment from there. Thx again!
It really depends on the size and type of arthropod.
For bees the usual recommendation is a stereo/dissecting microscope, usually 20x magnification is sufficient, even for the little 5 mm ones. For hairy insects, storing in liquid isn’t ideal, as it tends to mat the hair and colors can be difficult to see when wet.
I realize that 5mm is giant for a springtail, but as arthropods go it is still on the small end of things and you did indicate you were not exclusively interested in springtails.
1 Like
I really do not know about observing these arthropods. What do you need the 1000 x magnification for?
I was actaully expecting a good stereo disection scope.
1 Like
Oh, I see what you mean! I was actually referring more to springtails and other tiny soil critters rather than bees or larger insects. Those ones are so small that they usually need a bit more magnification to see the details. My bad about the lack of clarity!
For most insects, a dissecting microscope is more useful because most insects are of a size that makes them too big to see under a compound microscope and because they are too opaque to allow light through. Compound microscopes work by light passing from below through the specimen up into the eye piece, while dissecting microscopes catch light reflecting off the specimen. Dissecting microscopes go from about 10x to 100x and that is a big enough range for most entomology. I have one with just two magnifications, 20x and 40x, which are good enough most days but I can also change the eyepieces to give me 80x. Compound microscopes go to much higher magnification, up to 1000x.
I did try identifying springtails one time when a new key needed testing, and I found some of the key characters were so small they needed a compound microscope. So if you want to specialise in springtails, you probably need both.
It is very hard to dissect under a compound microscope because there isn’t the working room between the specimen and the lens, and the view is reversed so the dissecting pin in your right hand would be on the left when you are looking down the microscope.
Second hand microscopes can be good value.
4 Likes
Thanks so much! This is great to know! I’ll see how reasonable the prices are for these.
Yeah, that is why clearing the pigment is pretty much needed to reduce that problem.
1 Like
Often, I use more like 600x-800x, but 1000x is sometimes needed. Mostly for seeing if hairs are serrated (or blunt), or seeing other often needed features of springtails.
1 Like
Stereo microscopes are basically just less magnification versions of compound ones. As @jhbratton said, if you can’t clear the springtail, a dissecting microscope would be needed. But I often find myself having to clear springtails anyways so I can see some features that even good lighting can’t always show.
1 Like
I see. That means the hassle with oil immersion.
2 Likes
Hmm, my microscope (it’s a really cheap one) doesn’t actually need that. I believe 2000x or more is where oil immersion is required.
1 Like
That depends on the eyepiece, of course. Usually the 100x objective is for oil immersion.
2 Likes
with 100oil you look at blood and bacteria and stuff like that.
with 40x you see mosquito babies and they get huge.
binoc can be nice but often you only need one eye and the other side you can use to measure with a raster eyepiece, if you need such a thing, if you can afford it cool, else no problem.
super cool is, if you can add a cam, but this is may not free of cost, still you can do photos with your mobile or webcam if you fumble a bit around with focus.
there exist also eyepice-like “webcams” which fit into the mount.
get an old microscope from second hand, often older microscopes are massive metal and better than new plastic stuff.
avoid super cheap kid toys or digital magnification like 1024x, mostly they have cheap lenses, and it will be more frustrating than fun, also digital magnification you can do your self in GIMP or what ever, may even in mspaint or such a cheapest app.
there are some cheap, but good microscopes, they do some thing like 40x to 300x.
what they call biological microscope goes mostly up to 400 or 600, what they call medical microscope goes at least up to 1000 (100oil*10eye-piece)
How ever if you get a good secondhand microscope they use RMS objectives and later you can buy new objectives and change them as you like, same on eye-pices, olympus tokyo, wild heerbrugg, leitz wetzlar, zeiss and what ever… even fancy odd russian microscopes use mostly or always the same RMS screw.
if you go to fungi and spores you need a medical microscope for very sure, you may find an old one for cheap.
if you are lucky you may even find an institute like a school where they buy new ones and throw old good microscopes into the trash, may a wise student is so friendly and cares to announce it, because it is really sad to trash the old ones just to fulfill the budgetplan.
some come with a mirror for the light from below and you need to fumble a bit around, others have a light may even dimmable, some have some filters.
if you need light from above, poorman solution, use a lamp from above, may some cheap night table lamp with LED an battery or better.
for your springtails you may look at https://www.naturespot.org/node/132162 .. looks very nice.
here what you get with a cheap usb microscope from a suppermarked https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_lPdIAG5s8 probably not what you want
this is maybe also interesting https://www.apogeephoto.com/practical-tips-to-insect-microphotography/ .. looks very nice.
here some pollen from plant https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/135495885 or here halloween https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/311694667 :))
1 Like
For a medical microscope I would definitely recommend an electric light with a field diaphragm and a well-adjustable condenser with an iris diaphragm. The lenses can be achromatic for ordinary work. Aplanatic or apochromatic are much more expensive. The difference will be seen in the photos and they will not be comparable to the professional ones, but the profi equipment is very expensive.
2 Likes