Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 11:54:32 -0600
From: Angelo Capparella <>
Reply-To: Bulletin Board for Bird Collections and Curators
<>
To:
Subject: Re: [AVECOL-L] arsenic and old birds (fwd)
I found the following in my file on arsenic in collections.
Hawks, C.A. and S.L. Williams. 1986. Arsenic in natural history collections.
Leather Conservation News. 2(2):1-4.
At that time, Hawks and Williams were in the Section of Mammals at
the Carnegie Museum of Natural History. They provide an interesting history
regarding the kinds of preservatives used over time. Apparently, arsenic
in different forms (important in terms of measuring toxicity and
pathways of entry into humans) was used as late as the second
half of the 20th century ("was used on birds at the Smithsonian until
the early 1970s"), although the impression is that 19th and early 20th century is the more likely time frame. They say inorganic arsenicals can be
absorbed through lungs and skin.
Their recommendations for specimens thought to have been prepared with
arsenic: Use gloves, dust mask, and protective clothing when moving/handling. Any specimen exhibiting powdery or crystalline deposits should be tested for arsenic contamination. They give detailed instructions on doing a simple wet-chemical test to quickly screen specimens for the presence of arsenic.
In a posting on the Museum-L listserv in 1995, Sally Shelton (Director,
Collections Care and Conservation, San Diego Natural History Museum)
stated that many preparators/taxidermists used arsenic well into the 1950s and 1960s. She suggests wearing gloves and a respirator if working with known problem specimens, and testing those that are suspicious. She
suggests examining bare skin areas and surfaces of glass eyes for
powdery or crystalline deposits.
So it sounds like something to take precautions with, and maybe even
testing for.
Angelo Capparella
Curator of Birds and Mammals
Illinois State University
======
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 13:40:10 -0500
From: James Dean <>
Reply-To: Bulletin Board for Bird Collections and Curators
<>
To:
Subject: Re: [AVECOL-L] arsenic and old birds (fwd)
Van, et. al.
Here is a copy of my response to the same question I received last week.
James
------
Up through the 1960's or 1970's it was common during the preparation of bird and mammal specimens, both taxidermy mounts and study skins, to be treated with
arsenic as a preservative against insect pests. Not all specimens were treated
but a large percentage of specimens prepared before the 1920's were likely
treated.
There were three main methods that the arsenic was applied. The first was the
dusting or "painting" of the inside skin of the specimen with arsenic powder. A
second method mixed the arsenic powder with borax or aluminum sulphate. Many
old ornithologists and mammalogists would have a container of powder and use a
paint brush or a rabbit's foot to brush the arsenic into the inside of the
specimen's skin.
The third method was to use arsenical soap. This was made by combining soap
flakes, potash, arsenic camphor, alcohol and water to make a slurry. This was
painted or brushed onto the inside of the skin during the preparation process.
I believe that the arsenical soap was used more commonly on mounted specimens.
I have heard some people comment that arsenic powder was sometimes sprinkled
onto the feathers or fur and worked down to the skin on mounted birds and
mammals as an additional guard against pests. I have never seen any
documentation that this practice was wide spread, if used at all.
Opinions vary widely about the dangers of the arsenic in these older specimens.
Arsenic has been shown to be carcinogenic, but that is generally for long term
exposure with ingestion of fairly large amounts of arsenic. I am of the opinion
that as long as the specimens are cleaned and do not have tears in them where
arsenic is falling out of the specimen, then the specimens should be safe to
use if a few precautions are followed.
My recommendations would be as follows.
1. Examine the specimens to see if they have tears in the skin or places where
a white powder is spilling out. Bear in mind that if you do see white powder it
could be plaster of Paris if the skin was stretched over a plaster mannequin.
2. If the specimens are in good shape then I would recommend a cleaning. This
will remove any dust or other compounds lightly attached to the feather, fur or
the outer skin layer. Cleaning can be accomplished in several manners.
The best would be to vacuum the specimen with a HEPA filtered vacuum cleaner
using small nozzle attachments. I would also suggest picking up a roll of
fiberglass replacement window screening which can be cut up into squares and
used to hold the feathers or fur in place while vacuuming the specimens. Vacuum
in the direction the fur or feathers lay.
If you do not have a HEPA vacuum, but do have access to compressed air, then
the specimens can be blown with air to clean them. Again blow the air over them
in the direction the feathers or fur lays to prevent ruffling. Do not use the
full strength of the air compressor. The window screening can be used here as
well to help hold the feathers or fur in place.
An alternative would be to use a hair dryer as your source of forced air. Use it on a cold setting and again blow the air over the specimens in the direction
the feathers or fur lays.
3. After cleaning the specimens should be fairly safe to use for teaching
purposes. If the students or staff are to handle the specimens keep in mind
that their contact with the specimens is generally going to be short term. As
long as the specimen have been cleaned and there are no openings in the
specimen where a white powder is falling out, then in my opinion the specimen
could be used for teaching purposes.
A few precautions. Persons handling the specimens should wash their hands
before and after contact. This not only will remove any arsenic or other dust
that might have been picked up from the specimen, but the before washing cleans
the hands of oils, dirt, etc. that might get deposited on the specimen.
It would be a good idea to have a supply of disposable gloves on hand -
surgical gloves made of latex or vinyl, or cotton gloves. These could be made available to students and staff that have concerns about the potential of
arsenic. We are required to maintain a supply of gloves for just that purpose.
Specimens that do have tears in them can still be useful in teaching. The safe
bet would be to use them in an environment where they are not handled by the
students. They could be placed in a glass or plastic display case, or even set
out in the open up on a high shelf or cabinet.
James Dean
Collections Manager
Department of Systematic Biology
Division of Birds, MRC-116
National Museum of Natural History
10th and Constitution, NW
Washington DC 20560-0116
======
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 09:26:37 +1300
From: Brian Gill <>
Reply-To: Bulletin Board for Bird Collections and Curators
<>
To:
Subject: [AVECOL-L] Arsenic and old birds
t Auckland Museum our birds go back to 1856, and all the older ones that
have been tested are positive for arsenic. A couple of years ago we opened
four new natural history galleries, for which around 200 older bird mounts
had to be cleaned. This was done by a team of conservation interns. They used masks, gloves and fume cupboards where possible, but larger birds (e.g.
ratites) had to be cleaned in gallery spaces. Towards the end of the
process the whole team was tested for arsenic from 24-hour urine samples. I
was tested too, having handled old specimens for 18 years. I hadn't used
gloves routinely, but had always avoided inhaling dust, and washed my hands
after touching any skins or mounts. We all had arsenic levels within the
normal range, showing that simple precautions work. The medical specialist
told the young woman with the highest levels (high end of normal) that her
fondness for sushi may have contributed. Apparently seaweed can be a source
of dietary arsenic.
BRIAN GILL
------
B.J. Gill, Curator of Land Vertebrates, Auckland Museum, Private Bag 92018,
Auckland, New Zealand.