[Nhcoll-l] Taxidermy mount testing

Thu Jun 27 14:25:51 EDT 2013

Hi Kathryn,

Thank you for your kind words regarding the arsenic testing project at the
Michigan State University (MSU) Museum.  

I conveyed to Mr. North that the MSU Museum obtained grant funding
(2011-2013, from the IMLS) to conduct arsenic tests on over 700 of our
mounted specimens using a handheld XRF analyzer.  A local industrial hygiene
services company (Fibertec, Inc of Holt, Michigan) was contracted to rent
the analyzer and conduct the tests, at the recommendation of the MSU
Environmental Health and Safety (EHS) Office.  In the end, we were able to
test over 1,000 museum specimens (including both taxidermy mounts and study
skins) in a 13-day period with the analyzer.  Details are included in a
poster that we presented at the 2012 meeting of the Society for the
Preservation of Natural History Collections (SPNHC) at Yale University.

If anyone else would like a pdf copy of our poster, please send me an e-mail
message off list (abraczi1 at msu.edu).

Our poster citation is below.

Society for the Preservation of Natural History Collections Program. 2012.
Oral and Poster Presentation Abstracts, page 43. Abraczinskas, L.M.,
Siciliano, L.M., Lundrigan, B.L. Detecting arsenic in vertebrate specimens
at the Michigan State University Museum using a handheld X-ray fluorescence
(XRF) analyzer.

The program and abstracts (pdf) can be found at this link
http://peabody.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/botany/SPNHC2012-Progr
am%2BAbstracts-8june.pdf

Best regards,
Laura

Laura Abraczinskas, Collections Manager
Vertebrate Collections
Michigan State University Museum
409 West Circle Drive, Room 103
East Lansing, Michigan  48824

517/355-1290 Office Phone
517/432-2846 FAX

-----Original Message-----
From: nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu
[mailto:nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Kathryn Makos
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 3:48 PM
To: nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu
Subject: Re: [Nhcoll-l] Taxidermy mount testing

Greetings! Mr. North and I just spoke and I wanted to post our conversation
in response to this issue.  

As Ellen Carrlee has said, the portable XFR is fairly ubiquitous now in
major facilities, certainly a university system; and one with a RCRA metals
profile will give you useful data as long as the user understands what
settings to properly use.  Plus, many, many data points should be taken
since preservatives/pesticides like arsenicals were not always evenly
applied and/or may have migrated unevenly to the surfaces of the specimen.

Industrial hygiene/environmental/NIOSH methodologies to use for
identification would also include moistened surface wipes and vacuum
sampling with pumps and MCEF filters (ICP analysis typically).  You said
that your local state occupational health lab had those options.

I used to take a wipe (gloved hands natch) and rub (to the extent allowed by
collection mgr) surfaces for an overall sample.  Be sure to concentrate on
seams and the like with mounts, as they may be weakened through age and now
portals for interior treatment materials to leach.  Wipes do not always
account for internal treatment material presence (XRF should handle that)
but still give a fairly good idea of contamination.

In response to your question as to any "museum" standards for clearance: as
you suspected the laws/regulations that apply are the same as applicable to
any use of a chemical (EPA FIFRA etc, OSHA HazCom, OSHA arsenic standards
etc) and the concerns in this case would be whether the teaching collection
staff are covered by a university safe work practice and hazard
communication system, whether the staff have had exposure monitoring or
control training, and whether the center also cautions collection users of
possible hazards and ways to protect themselves (gloves & hand washing come
to mind).  Having a HEPA vacuum to clean drawers, work surfaces and display
cases is basic.

There are no standards for legal clearance except, as Dr. Carrlee notes, to
say that the analytical results were below the levels of detection or
quantitation.  Which, if these are sensitive enough, can be pretty
definitive.

Finally, Michigan State Univ EHS staff have worked closely with the
Vertebrate Zoology (I hope I'm right about the unit) collections management
staff on a comprehensive testing of specimens and personal exposure
measurements.  You said that the collections manager has contacted you and
you definitely should study the 2012 SPNHC poster she sent, as their survey
has extremely useful & impressive data.  That should provide you with a
variety of state-of-the-art IH analytical methods.

Very respectfully,
Kathryn Makos, MPH, CIH

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 13:15:39 -0500 (CDT)
From: Ralph North <rnorth at uwsa.edu>
Subject: [Nhcoll-l] Hazardous materials
To: nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu
Message-ID: <c54e6e13-036a-403d-b7dd-c82e9a51e113 at newman>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Hello, 

Do you use a commercial laboratory to test animal taxidermy mounts for the
presence of arsenic and other hazardous materials ? 

If not, do you use a home test kit? I became aware of Weber's test. Is this
an "industry standard"? 

Is there a "certified clean" certification or something similar? Is there a
regimen of materials for which testing should be done? I know about As, Hg,
Pb. 
Is there a year before which you assume a mount has been treated with
arsenic? 
Thanks. 
Ralph North, CHMM
Environmental Affairs Specialist
University of Wisconsin System

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 19:05:01 +0000
From: "Carrlee, Ellen M (EED)" <ellen.carrlee at alaska.gov>
Subject: Re: [Nhcoll-l] Hazardous materials
To: Rortvedt deZero <rortvedt at hotmail.com>,
	"nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu" <nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu>
Message-ID:

<7FBD8145FD0C8741986D1A196355871E65E99A4A at SOAJNUEXMB1.soa.alaska.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

In the museum field, it is common to use a kit or a procedure similar to the
one here:
http://ellencarrlee.wordpress.com/2009/01/14/arsenic-testing-step-by-step/

Using a known positive and a known negative in a rigorous way is important
in making sure the results are valid.

Some museums now have the ability to use a portable XRF for testing of some
pesticide toxins in which the elements are heavy enough to be detected
(Arsenic, mercury, lead etc).  There are toxins that are present on
taxidermy specimens that are not visible to XRF.
I am not aware of a museum saying "certified clean" for arsenic because your
test is only valid for the sample area you have tested.  We tend to say, "no
arsenic detected in sample" or something similar.  Usually many areas of the
specimen are tested to increase the confidence in the results.

I am aware of arsenic being used on taxidermy well into the 1980's.  If
there is no specific law against it, it could be used past then as well.

Ellen Carrlee
Objects Conservator
Alaska State Museum

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

_______________________________________________
Nhcoll-l mailing list
Nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu
http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/nhcoll-l

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 8494 (20130626) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 8496 (20130627) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 8497 (20130627) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 8497 (20130627) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com