[NHCOLL-L:3396] Re: Labels for wet collection

[Schneider, Gregory]

I believe the solution to permanent wet labels for specimens exists with
the use of UV curable inks (now commonly used in industry).  This
article may be of interest:

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?Filename=Publis
hed/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/1290330502.html#b7



Greg Schneider
Division of Reptiles and Amphibians
Museum of Zoology
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1079
734 647 1927     734 763 4080 (FAX)
ges at umich.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nhcoll-l at lists.yale.edu
[mailto:owner-nhcoll-l at lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of amsnyder at unm.edu
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 11:17 AM
To: Richard Rego; NHCOLL-L at lists.yale.edu
Subject: [NHCOLL-L:3386] Re: Labels for wet collection

Richard,

I am going to respond to you "on-list" because this question (cost 
effective wet collections labels) comes up almost annually on the SPNHC 
list.  Others on the list will have different recommendations, but the 
following is "my take" on the issue. (That is, I do not, never have, and

never will endorse laser printed labels for wet collection application.)

The Epson LQ 870(ESC P2) impact printer works well to print Resistal and

Tyvek paper labels (single sheet or tractor feed). I have successfully
used 
this product, for almost 20 years, to produce labels for fluid-preserved

collections (fishes and herps).  On an average, we produce 3000 jar and 
vial labels a year. (We archive large collections of fish eggs and
larvae 
from annual monitoring projects for several NM river systems.)  This 
labeling system has been very reliable. FYI: I also produce Tyvek labels

for use in genetic collections, stored in 95% ethanol and -80C ultracold

freezer.  Epson pre-printed tissue labels (Tyvek) have been successfully

used for field collections in liquid nitrogen.

Issues related to impact printers and the paper:
1.  The non-bleed, ethanol resistant permanent ink is no longer
available 
(the last word I had from the distributor in Maryland) but you can still

use the (fabric ribbon) regularly inked cartridges to produce wet
labels. 
You will need to rinse the excess ink out of the labels before placing
them 
in the jar of specimens.

2.  Resistal labeling paper is very acidic (due to the manufacturing 
process) and could very well be a problem in causing bone loss in larval

fishes.  Definitely a problem for the jar fluid pH factor.

3. As with any fluid-preserved specimen labeling system, I recommend
using 
a backup label, with the specimen catalog number, be placed in the jar
or 
vial.  I currently use preprinted (Forbon tags)labels from Allen-Bailey
Tag 
and Label, Inc. but a small wet strength paper label with the catalog 
number written on it using a technical pen and Higgins Eternal ink
should 
work.

Anyway, I have often recommended this method of wet label production for

small collections with limited budgets or agency biologists wishing to 
preprint their own field labels or field notes.  If you need specifics
on 
the above information, contact me off list and I will be glad to provide

you with details.

Best,  Lex



--On Sunday, April 15, 2007 7:34 PM -0400 Richard Rego 
<mummichog at verizon.net> wrote:

>
> Good Day,
>
>     I am looking for information regarding printers used for making
> labels for wet collections (ETOH and IPA).  I am currently using
> Resistall paper and hand writing with alcohol resistant ink pens.  I'd
> like to change over to computerized labels and would like to know if
> anyone is using a specific printer (which brand, model # and ink
> cartridge).
>
>     I have information regarding DataMax Thermal Transfer poly labels,
> but too cost prohibitive for a small collection.  Any information
would
> be appreciated.
>
>     Thank you.
>
> R.J. Rego


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alexandra M. Snyder
Collections Manager-Fishes
Museum of Southwestern Biology
University of New Mexico MSC03-2020
Albuquerque NM 87131 USA
505.277.6005  Tele/Fax
amsnyder at unm.edu