English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Four different combinations of light-traps and bulbs were tested during the summer 1996 in Kainuu, northern Finland: a Jalas model with a 160-W (J/160W) blended light lamp or a 125-W (J/125W) mercury vapour lamp, a Ryrholm trap with a 125-W (R/125W) mercury vapour lamp and a Rothamsted trap with a 200-W tungsten lamp (G/200W). The traps were rotated between four sites every night, but were kept in the same position for the fifth night in order to prevent the possible influence of moonlight. The longest distance between the traps was 150m, and there was no direct visibility between any of them. Three orders were inspected, i.e. Lepidoptera, Coleoptera and Hemiptera, the total numbers of individuals and species being as follows: 20857/425, 862/101 and 1868/58. G/200W collected significantly fewer moths than the other traps. In some cases, J/125W collected significantly more moths and less species than the J/160W design. The R/125W design collected significantly more species than the J/160W design. Similar differences in the effectiveness of the lamps and traps were found in the case of Coleoptera and Hemiptera. Alpha diversities showed the same trend.

Intercalibration of different light-traps and bulbs used in moth monitoring in northern Europe