COMPARATIVE STUDIES BETWEEN CLASSICAL AND MODERN SAMPLING TECHNIQUES TO IDENTIFY THE CONTAMINANTS FROM ENTOMOLOGY ITEMS

Dorina  SIMEDRU; Anca  NAGHIU; Marius  ROMAN; Mirela  MICLEAN; Ana  BORGOVAN

COMPARATIVE STUDIES BETWEEN CLASSICAL AND MODERN SAMPLING TECHNIQUES TO IDENTIFY THE CONTAMINANTS FROM ENTOMOLOGY ITEMS

Authors

Dorina SIMEDRU Research Institute for Analytical Instrumentation (INCDO-INOE 2000), Cluj-Napoca, Romania. Email: dorina.simedru@icia.ro. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4914-6986
Anca NAGHIU Research Institute for Analytical Instrumentation (INCDO-INOE 2000), Cluj-Napoca, Romania. Email: ancanaghiu@gmail.com. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1418-689X
Marius ROMAN Research Institute for Analytical Instrumentation (INCDO-INOE2000), Cluj-Napoca, Romania. Email: marius.roman@icia.ro. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1074-2529
Mirela MICLEAN Research Institute for Analytical Instrumentation (INCDO-INOE 2000), Cluj-Napoca, Romania. Email: mirela.miclean@usamvcluj.ro. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7884-8827
Ana BORGOVAN Research Institute for Analytical Instrumentation (INCDO-INOE 2000), Cluj-Napoca, Romania. Corresponding author: marius.roman@icia.ro.

Keywords:

sampling procedure, museum, entomology items, naphthalene, total petroleum hydrocarbons

Abstract

Preservation of old entomology items, although very important, is very difficult due to the contamination which they were subjected to. In order to test the items contamination level with the classical sampling method, one must be very careful because they are very easily broken and can develop mold spores due to moistening. The subject of this study is to recreate in the laboratory the stages of preserving the entomology samples by using petroleum products and naphthalene. Then the samples are subjected to two types of sampling, the classical sampling and a new sampling using a special pump for air sampling. After a month in which the items were kept in a controlled environment, the sampling procedure was performed and the sample were analyzed. The results showed differences in the results obtained by two sampling techniques. The classical method proved to be more efficient but the items which were studied presented several defects.

References

A. V. Suarez, N. D. Tsutsui, BioScience, 2004, 54(1), 66.

D. J. Carter, A. K. Walker, “Collection environment”, Oxford: Butterwoth Heinemann, 1999, chapter 7.

http://www.amnh.org/our-research/natural-science-collections-conservation/general-conservation/health-safety/residual-pesticides.

M. J. Linnie, M. J. Keatinge, International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 2000, 45(1/2), 1.

P.B. Hatchfield, “Pollutants in the Museum Environment”, Archetype Publications Ltd., London, 2002, chapter 1.

https://www.bnl.gov/esh/shsd/sop/pdf/ih_sops/ih75190.pdf

http://collections.rmsc.org/LibCat/links/Surface_wipe_procedure.pdf

N. Odegaaed, A. Sadongei, “Old Poisons new problems – A museum resource for managing contaminate cultural materials”, Walnut Creek: Altamira Press, 2005.

P. Reuben, Collection Forum, 2006, 20(1-2), 33.

P. Jane Sirois, J. S. Johnson, A. Shugar, J. Poulin, O. Madden, “Preserving Aboriginal Heritage: Technical and Traditional Approaches”, Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Canada, 2008.

I. D. Rushworth, C. Higgitt, M. Smith, L. T. Gibson, Heritage Science, 2014, 2, 3.

M. Şenilă, E. Levei, L. Şenilă, O. Cadar, M. Roman, M. Miclean, Studia UBB Chemia, 2015, LX, 2, Tom I, 137.

A. Naghiu, D. Simedru, M. Miclean, L. Senila, M. Roman, C. Laslo, “The 17th international symposium on analytical and environmental problems”, Szeged, Ungaria, 2011.

STUDIA UBB CHEMIA, Volume 61 (LXI), No. 3, September 2016

Downloads

Published

2016-09-30

How to Cite

SIMEDRU, D. ., NAGHIU, A. ., ROMAN, M. ., MICLEAN, M. ., & BORGOVAN, A. . (2016). COMPARATIVE STUDIES BETWEEN CLASSICAL AND MODERN SAMPLING TECHNIQUES TO IDENTIFY THE CONTAMINANTS FROM ENTOMOLOGY ITEMS. Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Chemia, 61(3), 423–429. Retrieved from https://studia.reviste.ubbcluj.ro/index.php/chemia/article/view/8365