The argument, published in the journal Natural History Collections and Museomics, draws on more than two years of firsthand experience using outreach collections from the Snow Entomological Museum at public events. These include Hasta Luego Monarchs, an annual insect education event organised around the monarch butterfly migration by the Johnson County Extension Master Naturalists and Monarch Watch, and Night in the Museum, hosted by the university’s Biodiversity Institute. Each event draws several hundred visitors, mostly children and their parents. And while visitors appear engaged, the author noticed a persistent separation between the public and the insects featured in the outreach drawers — remarks of disgust, squealing, flailing arms and visitors refusing to stand too close were common, especially among adults.

That separation, the author contends, is precisely what live insects can eliminate. The insight grew out of time spent caring for Bug Town, an exhibit at the Biodiversity Institute featuring fifteen live arthropod species ranging from wolf spiders and assassin bugs to hissing cockroaches and water scorpions. During daily husbandry of these animals, a striking pattern emerged: adult viewers remained apprehensive about the insects behind the glass panels, but children aged roughly four to twelve were invariably curious. If the keeper was actively handling an insect, the children wanted to touch or hold it, while the adults stayed back, especially when the animals were out of the case and within arm’s reach. The author cites studies suggesting that fear of insects is learned from adults, and argues that direct interaction with living insects is crucial to developing compassion toward them, regardless of age.

The physical design of entomological outreach collections compounds the problem. Pinned specimens are fragile, so keeping them in sealed cases is a key safety consideration — but the more the specimens are protected, the greater the separation between viewer and specimen. Unlike a fur pelt or a trilobite fossil, a pinned insect cannot be handled in the same way. It is easy to love charismatic megafauna when a personal connection can be established by touching and holding them, particularly when they are soft and cuddly. No one wants to cuddle a pinned cockroach, the author notes, nor could they even if they wanted to.

Choosing which live insects to use requires careful consideration of the distinction between potentially harmful species and those that will not hurt viewers. Bees are the author’s preferred insects, but crickets and smaller feeder roaches can be readily acquired from pet stores, and slow-moving species unlikely to jump or fly suddenly — hissing cockroaches, walking sticks and caterpillars — are ideal because they are easy to handle without startling visitors. Educators must also be mindful of potential allergies, particularly life-threatening ones such as allergies to bee and wasp venom, which may make live insects unsuitable for some audiences.

Male bees, specifically male bumble bees and carpenter bees, are the author’s top choice for live demonstrations. They are large and easy to catch at flowers, and because they lack the stinger that female bees possess, people can touch and hold them without being stung. Males can be identified by two primary traits: the length of their antennae and the presence of a large yellow face on the head. The author always collects live bees from native flowers near the outreach event, which increases the chances of the bee being a native species and provides a place to release it afterwards. The European honeybee is deliberately avoided — it is non-native, readily stings, and is the bee the public is already most familiar with.

When giving visitors the opportunity to handle a live bee, the author explains that the bee is male and cannot sting, and reassures them that they can have a firm grasp on it without hurting it. Visitors who feel uneasy about holding the bee in their fingers can simply cup their hands around it entirely, allowing it to move freely within their palms. The outreach drawers used in tandem contain both male and female specimens, so visitors can compare body size and colouration between the sexes, and if available a live female of the same species is kept temporarily in a glass jar for comparison. This also opens the door to discussing life history traits, such as what solitary bees are and why females can sting more than once without dying.

The emotional payoff of these interactions is immediate. Bumble bees buzz when threatened or handled, and the sensation and volume of the buzzing makes people laugh or surprises them at its intensity — sometimes both. By holding a live bee and feeling its movements, the notion that insects are just things dissolves; they become real. Getting to handle an insect shows viewers that these animals are truly alive, and it motivates them to care more about insects because they are no longer just pinned specimens behind glass. The author points to classroom monarch butterfly rearing and coordinated release to the wild — a component of the Hasta Luego Monarchs event — as another example of how hands-on positive interactions with live insects can inspire the public to care about the issues insects face both around the world and in their own backyards.

The author acknowledges that the observations presented are mostly derived from personal experience and are therefore likely biased, particularly given the limited research on the impact of incorporating live insects into outreach collections. But the recommendations for future evaluation are concrete. Research should assess different levels of incorporation of live insects, from none — pinned specimen-based collections — to full incorporation, such as raising monarch butterflies as hands-on learning. It may also be interesting to investigate the impact of photos of living specimens compared to photos of pinned museum specimens where living specimens are not accessible. An immediate suggestion would be the use of exit questionnaires for event visitors regarding their experiences with the collections, their feelings about insects and related topics after viewing and interacting with live organisms. Public feedback on these questionnaires can provide helpful insight into how visitors interact with outreach collections and inform future additions or changes. Another suggestion would be to gather data on the number of people who approached the collection, the number who only looked at the drawers versus the number who handled a live specimen, and the ages of the visitors — quantifiable data that can direct future outreach events and provide information for future studies.

The core message is that outreach collections can only benefit from the incorporation of live insects, which the author considers crucial to their future success as educational tools. By integrating living specimens with traditional displays, museums can inspire deeper connections and encourage conservation efforts, ensuring that people see insects as living organisms worth protecting rather than just specimens behind glass. In an era when insect diversity is threatened by anthropogenic factors and their interactions with plants and other organisms are at risk, fostering that personal connection may be one of the most effective ways to turn passive viewers into active participants in insect conservation.

Subject of Research: Use of live insects in museum outreach collections to foster public empathy and conservation

Article Title: Enhancing outreach collections with live insects

Article References: Herbison, N. (2025). Enhancing outreach collections with live insects. Natural History Collections and Museomics, 2, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.3897/nhcm.2.148359

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3897/nhcm.2.148359

Keywords: entomology, outreach collections, live insects, bumble bees, carpenter bees, museum education, insect conservation, fear of insects, public engagement, pollinators, Enhancing, outreach