[NHCOLL-L:4112] RE: Possible replacement to alcohol storage?

[Furth, David]

All good points.  

 

Relative to point number 2, there have been some publications about the
use and effectiveness of propylene glycol to preserve DNA.  Also our
Invertebrate Zoology has been using Propylene Phenoxytol or a similar
"sorting solution", especially for smaller-bodied specimens with
exoskeletons (e.g., plankton) otherwise stored in formalin.  However, I
am not certain about the length of time this has been used successfully.

 

******************************************************

David G. Furth, Ph.D.

Department of Entomology

MRC 165, P.O. Box 37012

National Museum of Natural History

Smithsonian Institution

Washington, D. C. 20013-7012  USA

Phone: 202-633-0990

Fax: 202-786-2894

Email: furthd at si.edu <mailto:furthd at si.edu> 

Website: www.entomology.si.edu <http://www.entomology.si.edu>  

________________________________

From: owner-nhcoll-l at lists.yale.edu
[mailto:owner-nhcoll-l at lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of John E Simmons
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 9:30 PM
To: JBRYANT at riversideca.gov
Cc: Makos, Kathryn; NHCOLL-L at lists.yale.edu
Subject: [NHCOLL-L:4099] RE: Possible replacement to alcohol storage?

 

This is a very interesting discussion, and I am pleased to see the level
of interest in the topic. I would like to add a few points:

1.  Museums lack proper studies of what happens to containers of 70%
ethanol or "10% formalin" during a fire.  Data exists for storage of
retail liquor (which averages less than 15% alcohol) and bulk storage of
95% alcohol in large drums, but museum collections and specimens on
exhibit fall in between.  The cost of such studies is very high--it
would be great if Factory Mutual or some outfit like that would take up
the cause.  We know that ethanol is flammable, but we also know that
ethanol fumes disperse very quickly from an opened container or a spill,
greatly reducing the fire hazard.  We really don't know how much of a
danger the specimens pose, but we do know it is far less than 95%
alcohol (the rules for 95% alcohol are frequently applied to museum
collections).  In their defense, we must remember that the regulatory
agencies have to make a guess by extrapolating from existing
regulations, which usually leaves all parties unhappy.

2.  We need to keep in mind the difference between a preservative (a
chemical that prevents deterioration from occurring, such as alcohol or
formaldehyde) and a "holding solution" that might be used in the short
term while a fluid preserved specimen is on exhibit or used in a
classroom (e.g., Novec, or the available proprietary fluids such as
Wardsafe or Carosafe that contain glycols, phenols, and other
compounds).  The "holding solutions" don't preserve specimens long-term
and may be very harmful to the specimen.

3.  The literature on fluid preservation is full of recommendations of
oddball concoctions that various individuals have claimed are good
preservatives, but most of them are not.  To avoid adding even more
anecdotal recipes to the mix, museums should follow the lead of the
Smithsonian and collect all the data they can from experiments with new
fluids.

--John

John E. Simmons
Museologica
128 E. Burnside Street
Bellefonte, Pennsylvania 16823-2010
simmons.johne at gmail.com
303-681-5708
and
Adjunct Curator of Collections
Earth and Mineral Science Museum & Art Gallery
Penn State University
19 Deike Building
University Park, Pennsylvania 16802-2709
jes67 at psu.edu

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/private/nhcoll-l/attachments/20081208/4fcf1bd2/attachment.html