Pierce through beetles in collections?

no, this is not an option ))
on mattresses - it will be a complete mess. Although, if you lay out all the krasiov on mattresses - the same option, but only with the goal of later spreading it out sometime.. But here there is a great danger of losing due to crzheeds, breaking, etc.

For example, collecting on a mattress is only for temporary storage, storing your own " funds "or for" storing " material for exchange. And in the frame - this is a decorative option.

Entalex

There is also an option not to glue or prick:- ) on mattresses to collect, or two needles from the sides to fix in the frame...

Then, as an option for long-term and more protected storage, in individual packages under cellophane on a cardboard with a lining, as in commercial entomology.

or stick beetles directly in the boxes ))

I'm a little late to join in the discussion, but I'll still give you my professional opinion. Glue or prick - it does not matter, it is important what goal you are pursuing. If you are going to take the collection with you to the grave-do as you see fit. But I have come across many cases when amateur collectors at the end of their lives or simply "burned out" wanted to give the collection to a scientific institution. And that's where the problems start. Improperly mounted insects are very difficult to work with, and if you have long-term plans to transfer your collection, then you need to make it easier to work with it. You can not glue on artificial polymers - they are prone to self-decay. Glue only on thin cardboard, preferably "acid free paper". In my work, I have seen old dies made of fine mica. They look decent, but in my opinion the sheepskin is not worth the trouble. It is desirable to glue with water-soluble adhesives: "Hercules", CMC (carboxymethyl cellulose), you can also use gum. PVA cannot be used: it contains acid that destroys chitin over time, and the glue itself loses its ability to dissolve over time. In my opinion, most beetles and bedbugs with a size of 20 mm or more should be pricked. The weight of large insects will eventually skew the die and it will start to hang out. Yes, and you need to be able to glue. Some must be glued to the side or like the Americans to the side. Many key features, such as in Histeridae and Coccinellidae, are located on the underside of the body, and if you stick them as usual, you will get beautiful beetles without information. Well, the advice to keep "collections" glued to boxes, under cellophane or pricked with hidden needles-this is not for a serious collection. If you have any questions , I'll share my experience.

It is desirable to glue with water-soluble adhesives: "Hercules", CMC (carboxymethyl cellulose), you can also use gum. PVA cannot be used: it contains acid that destroys chitin over time, and the glue itself loses its ability to dissolve over time.

You can learn more about the dangers of PVA. What chitin-destroying acid is contained there? At the beginning of the topic, they wrote that Hercules is an ordinary PVA. How is it better in principle?

Well, I don't know what kind of chitinoaggressive acid there is in PVA, if only we assume that microorganisms begin to develop under the PVA film, the mycelium of which secretes acid that can destroy anything at all.

You can learn more about the dangers of PVA. What chitin-destroying acid is contained there?

Regarding acid, dear Triplaxxx is right.
PVA is polyvinyl acetate. Over time, even with perfect storage, PVA will undergo depolymerization processes, resulting in acid formation. Which one? Acetic acid.
Perhaps, with prolonged contact, it will destroy the insect's integuments.
I can't say anything about the composition of "Hercules" - I don't know

Hercules glue is an aqueous dispersion of polyvinyl acetate with dibutyl phthalate. Very good for sticking beetles.

Regarding acid, dear Triplaxxx is right.
PVA is polyvinyl acetate. Over time, even with perfect storage, PVA will undergo depolymerization processes, resulting in acid formation. Which one? Acetic acid.
Perhaps, with prolonged contact, it will destroy the insect's integuments.
I can't say anything about the composition of "Hercules" - I don't know

  Hercules glue is an aqueous dispersion of polyvinyl acetate with dibutyl phthalate. Very good for sticking beetles.

Hence the conclusion: "Hercules" is partly the same "PVA". After all, there was a time when "Hercules" was not in sight (glued to the "PVA"). So far, the normal stuff looks like.

About acids: chitin is destroyed by various acids, so genitals and other structures are boiled in silk, and not in acids. And that is why vinegar and ethyl acetate (where most often there is also an admixture of uskus) soften dry insects so well. Acetic acid is weak, but with prolonged exposure, it also destroys chitin and pigments.

Someone asked about factory-made transparent plastic dies for sticking insects. There are some! Entomon now has several sizes and shapes of such dies, manufactured by Paradox Company (Krakow, Poland).

Hello. Let me timidly interfere with your discus. The topic of pricking or not pricking is truly relevant. One might even say that the future of applied and fundamental entomology in general depends on it. The decision that the modern collector ultimately makes for himself is somehow deeply rooted in Freudianism-whether you want it or not. "To have or to be? "(German: "Haben oder Sein") is a late work published in 1976 by the psychoanalyst and Freud - Marxist philosopher Erich Fromm, which explores the spiritual sphere of man. Attempt to become a superman. "Man has become a superman… But a superman endowed with superhuman strength has not yet risen to the level of superhuman intelligence. The more his power grows, the poorer he becomes... Our conscience must awaken from the consciousness that the more we turn into superhumans, the more inhuman we become" - A. Schweitzer.
What has been said directly concerns us all. What is our collection? For me, this is an image of what I read in books. The image of an integral matrix-nature that has produced a catalog of brilliant beings that we worship. What all this is for. I believe only in the continuity of generations. I must pass on my knowledge and work to humanity one step higher. There's no point in saving it up for yourself. My collection is a rock. A stone laid in the foundations of the study of the universe. You probably already feel the difference. We are all workers of the same workshop – the epistemology workshop. Workshops for learning the world.
Let us now turn specifically to our problem. The insect glued to the die is nothing more than a prototype of the substitution of the real for the ideal. Basic concepts about yourself and the era. It looks beautiful – it looks beautiful. But that's not why I came to this science. I don't want to be superhuman, because I'll never be superhuman. My task is to condense my ideas about the process and pass them on to another generation. Here is an insect that is impaled on a pin – it is like all the others. Bilateral symmetry throws a hole in the elytra into the abyss. The entomologist of the future will never think about it. The shape stereotype is important to him. So Fabre thought, and pricked the insects. So thought Darwin and pricked the insects.
An insect glued to a die is the equivalent of self-realization. This is a pleasing picture. This is nothing more than a subtle subconscious substitution for have or be. An insect soiled in glue and deprived of 50 percent of its surface is doomed to oblivion. It's ruined for nothing. We must not forgive this. We are the generation of ecocide resistance. Militant doctors of biosphere pathology. Prick and only prick. This is the only way we can possibly become immortal. There is no alternative.

A real-life example. The other day, a friend brought me insects on a needle and die. I was nice to him and gave him some sweet tea. After. I thought for a long time – well, why do I need an insect in glue? Well, why do I need this wrong piece of cloth that says nothing. A ruined creature for nothing. I stuck it in a separate box for defective material.

A real-life example. The other day, a friend brought me insects on a needle and die. I was nice to him and gave him some sweet tea. After. I thought for a long time – well, why do I need an insect in glue? Well, why do I need this wrong piece of cloth that says nothing. A ruined creature for nothing. I stuck it in a separate box for defective material.

If the insect is not glued with glue "Moment", then it is quite possible to remove it from the die by soaking or letting in a drop of ethyl acetate.

Here is an insect that is impaled on a pin – it is like all the others. Bilateral symmetry throws a hole in the elytra into the abyss. The entomologist of the future will never think about it. The shape stereotype is important to him. So Fabre thought, and pricked the insects. So thought Darwin and pricked the insects.

+5!!!

If the insect is not glued with glue "Moment", then it is quite possible to remove it from the die by soaking or letting in a drop of ethyl acetate.

Yes, a new round of discussion. And I couldn't resist, I'm a sinner . But I still have a question. Everyone agrees that you also need to work with the assembled material. To do this, it must be available for review. Why pick your nose through the anus? Why soak, let in, and peel off when it can be avoided? However, once again I emphasize that I do not impose anything on anyone (unlike some, albeit a few, ardent adherents of the sticker). I'm just stating the reasons why I personally pricked, prick and will continue to prick everything that is pricked. As for the bug stuff , everything is clear here. Every rule must have an exception - only then is it a real rule.

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 01.12.2010 13: 18

Yes, the argument is heating up with renewed vigor.Here are the arguments for the die. Try to drop the impaled insect and properly glued to the die-you will see the result immediately, the impaled insect will fall off everything that can only fall off,the insect on the die will be whole.Look at the beetles in boxes (for those who collect a collection for 15-20 years), where the tattoo in the box is a huge number of whiskers, legs (horns and hooves), where the dies are clean and tidy.When working with a collection,you will pull the box out of the cabinet 1000 times,open it,close it, and put it back in its place.From all these microscopic blows, and no matter how hard you try, there will be blows-everything falls off(especially for the most valuable copy).If you want your collection to go to a descendant of clay, glue carefully and everything can be viewed.If you don't like paper,stick it on transparent plastic(Bad Den once offered such baubles)-admire the underside(if you need it).That's my argument.Anyone who has ever seen insects collected at the beginning of the twentieth century will understand me-there are no 80% parts there, but for description,comparison and work,wow, you need whiskers, paws.So think ahead!!!
And the fact that the insect is impaled or glued-the scientific value of this does not decrease, only the safety.

About the injuries of the material(We are incandescent, we do not drop the material ), it also depends on how you drop it and the material on the dies broke, and the whole impaled one remained.
But if you look at practicality. Not every insect can be pricked, especially small specimens (1-3mm). But not every one can be pasted, try to stick a Goliath Beetle on the die, you will need a whole watman right there
I am in favor of small glue. Do not prick.

Personally, I prefer to prick precisely for the very reasons that Dmitrich voiced - precisely because of the convenience of work. Although, now I immediately try, for example, to extract genitals when mounting an instance, in order to reduce the number of manipulations with it in the future.

About the injuries of the material(We are incandescent, we do not drop the material ), it also depends on how you drop it and the material on the dies broke, and the whole impaled one remained.
But if you look at practicality. Not every insect can be pricked, especially small specimens (1-3mm). But not every one can be pasted, try to stick a Goliath Beetle on the die, you will need a whole watman right there
I am in favor of small glue. Do not prick.

You can also paste Goliath. On the dies and barbel-titanium paste

The safety of the material is of course an important argument and first of all it depends on the accuracy of people working with insects, you can break and pasted copies. Although, of course, there are more brittle groups, for example, large ground beetles easily fall off their legs and antennae. Sometimes, for reliability, an empty die larger than the beetle is pinned on the same pin at a distance of a couple of mm. This protects him quite well. Of course, you don't need to prick small things, although there are exceptions here. For example, all German oss should be pricked, even the smallest ones for a minute, otherwise it is often impossible to determine. Genitals, for those who need it, have long been removed directly during mounting and without processing I glue them either next to the beetle or in impaled specimens, on a small die. When it comes to determining them, it is easy to remove them from there with microdrops of water, process them and put them in glycerin.

FTOR:
sorry, of course, but your psto is utter nonsense )
Lots of lyrics, and no arguments.

My main argument for today will be INEVITABILITY. A broken beetle will always have a hole in it, and you can't cover it up (you can call it beautiful, you can call it terrible, but a hole is a hole). This inevitability also shows itself often in the case when the beetle has to be removed from the pin, and it is firmly attached to it, and it can either be left on the pin or thrown away. The beetle on the die can always be peeled off if necessary and desired.

You can also talk a lot about neat and not neat people, but no one is immune from accidents - and almost everyone (or everyone) once touches something or drops it or something else.. No one is immune from this - and it's not a matter of carelessness.

In any case, everyone chooses what he likes, and then he regrets what he chose.

FTOR:
sorry, of course, but your psto is utter nonsense )
Lots of lyrics, and no arguments.

I can't agree. The arguments are presented, and they are no less weighty (at least for those who disagree to provide counterarguments) than yours, Andrey. And the form of presentation is a personal matter of the author.
"Bilateral symmetry throws a hole in the elytra into the abyss" - yes, very flowery words. But isn't that the answer to your question: "There will always be a hole in the stab beetle, and it will not be covered up" ?

"The entomologist of the future will never think about this (meaning a hole in the elytra-V. T.). The stereotype of form is important to him. So Fabre thought, and pricked the insects. So thought Darwin and stabbed insects" - and this is not an argument?

"An insect soiled in glue and deprived of 50 percent of its surface is doomed to oblivion" - but this is disputed even from my point of view. But the author's position is marked. This is his argument. It's another matter whether someone agrees with him or not. In a word, you were overreacting Andrey, clearly overreacting.

My main argument for today will be INEVITABILITY. A broken beetle will always have a hole in it, and you can't cover it up (you can call it beautiful, you can call it terrible, but a hole is a hole).

Well, this is a dispute from the series "what is primary: chicken or egg". According to the adherents of the sticker-there is a hole. But for me - in a beetle, if it is not removed from the pin, not forever, but during the entire existence of this collector's copy, the pin will remain (which will completely hide the channel through which the beetle is impaled).

This inevitability also shows itself often in the case when the beetle has to be removed from the pin, and it is firmly attached to it, and it can either be left on the pin or thrown away. The beetle on the die can always be peeled off if necessary and desired.

Again, I disagree. In order to remove the beetle from the die, it must be soaked (otherwise the risk of breakage exceeds 99.99999...%). Smoke, and the beetle is perfectly removed from the pin after softening (I'll make a reservation-if it is covered with ethyl acetate, and not some tanning agent - but this is also true for glued copies). I have repeatedly been led to soften impaled beetles and rewire them to other pins, and no problems have occurred.

In any case, everyone chooses what he likes, and then he regrets what he chose.

But I agree with this statement 100%!!!

FTOR:
sorry, of course, but your psto is utter nonsense )
Lots of lyrics, and no arguments.

My main argument for today will be INEVITABILITY. A broken beetle will always have a hole in it, and you can't cover it up (you can call it beautiful, you can call it terrible, but a hole is a hole). This inevitability also shows itself often in the case when the beetle has to be removed from the pin, and it is firmly attached to it, and it can either be left on the pin or thrown away. The beetle on the die can always be peeled off if necessary and desired.

You can also talk a lot about neat and not neat people, but no one is immune from accidents - and almost everyone (or everyone) once touches something or drops it or something else.. No one is immune from this - and it's not a matter of carelessness.

In any case, everyone chooses what he likes, and then he regrets what he chose.

You can also remove the dried beetle from the pin. And you will spend less effort than when removing it from the die. And the probability that the instance will remain completely intact is higher.
But the question is: The die from which you removed the material, do you still use it later ??
I don't know all the techniques. But in most cases, it is thrown away. So it turns out that it is more practical to prick beetles. The pin can be straightened even if it bends, but the die can only be thrown out.(meaning cardboard dies)
About the hole. If your collection has a scientific value, then the hole will not affect the instance definitions. And to identify the beetle on the die, it will have to be peeled off, then glued again , in my opinion a waste of time and effort.

And to identify the beetle on the die, it will have to be peeled off, then glued again , in my opinion, a waste of time and effort.

Many people also forget that the beetle in the process of all these manipulations clearly does not get better, the safety of the specimen for a long time is usually inversely proportional to the amount of its soaking.

Ahrenet

I guess the argument doesn't make sense at all. Everyone chooses for themselves. Just pay attention: supporters of the traditional method of mounting (tattoos) are forced to explain their choice, since some adherents of total stickers completely deny impaling, claiming that the material spoils when the tattoo is made. That's something I can never agree with. I am convinced that this absurd opinion was initially spread by merchants, and then picked up by others. Calm down - stick to your health and deer, and goliaths and titans. No one bothers you. But also stop bitching traditional pricking. By the way, then be consistent to the end-invent a way to mount butterflies, webs, diptera, and so on. without pricking. All the statements that butterflies have wings as the main thing, that legs and breasts are not important for them in the collection at all - from the evil one. If you are in favor of the integrity of collectible instances, don't make absurd exceptions. A hole is a hole in a butterfly, a hole in a fly, or a hole in a wasp. Like morpho with a broken abdomen (the reasons for removing their abdomen are well known to everyone), this is a butterfly without a abdomen. In short, stick to yourself and do not dissuade us from pricking. No consensus is possible anyway.

A natural science collection is a special type of human activity that is fundamentally different from other types of collecting. The reason for this is the collectible itself. Well, look, for example, enthusiastic people collect paper banknotes, stripes and chevrons, buttons and pens for pens, flags and transport tickets, postage stamps and match labels, programs from football matches and calculators, beer corks and paper rings put on cigars, bells and wines. In a word, you can't count everything that is currently being actively collected. Natural collections stand out from all this. Have you ever heard that a collection of refrigerator magnets was the basis for the emergence or condition for the existence of an entire science? No, no one could ever have heard that. But collecting minerals is an integral part of mineralogy, entomology is unthinkable without a collection of insects, and botany will not go far without a herbarium. Here, as we can now see, the concept of collecting begins to transform into the concept of a research tool. It is not necessary to develop this thesis further and everything is already clear.
It just so happens that two camps of collectors - the Soviet and western ones-were separated from each other by a space-time barrier for a long time. In accordance with this, various processes of motivation for collecting techniques and the collectible itself took place. The Soviet methodology of cognition of the subject focused on the universe of cognition processes, the dialectical principle. Their universal meaning, if you will. I explain – there is a subject of study, so it must be fully known. This thesis requires the introduction of categorical terminology. Informative content is the main and most powerful argument of all proposed. It is on it that the main emphasis is placed when tattooing insects. The ultimate measure of information content is the scientific value of the collection in general.
When labeling insects on dies, the goal is to create an aesthetic idealization of the collection. The object of research turns into a certain keychain and the collection accordingly becomes a set of such intact keychains. This is to the detriment of its natural-scientific foundations, which, in fact, gave rise to the fascination with insects. All this is in tune with the Western understanding of the collection. Although not always. There are people in the West who, like us, do not accept the pasting of insects. Capitalization of the collection is the main goal, the so-called conversion of finance and labor costs as the equivalent of finance in insects. This has a negative impact on systematically organized and grounded knowledge about nature, society, and thinking. The concept of value is imperceptibly sublimated into the concept of value and is often substituted for one another in the course of discussion.. And these are completely different and hostile concepts in the context of cognition of the surrounding world.
I consider the issue of tattoos to be a matter of principle. With the sticker on the dies, a huge amount of valuable scientific material is currently ruined. Entomologists should not pass up this problem.

PS Entomologists block the movement of pasted insects around the country. DO NOT ACCEPT OR EXCHANGE MATERIALS THAT ARE GLUED TO THE DIES! STRONGLY CRITICIZE THIS METHOD OF COLLECTING!

Bravo!

Bravo!

Well, is it nonsense to invite everyone, to stab beetles?

I think I'll agree with Ripper.
I've seen a pinned-up piece of change completely unfolded(and what are they going to look at when all the belly and cephalothorax are covered with paws) and the same thing on the dies-a sight to behold!
Of course, you can shout about practicality and stab beetles by the thousands, or you can talk about aesthetics and straighten each beetle!
Yes, what can I say-go to the topic "collections" and see pricked beetles and spot beetles.Bugs at forumchan in the majority the same and it is possible to compare.
Didn't understand the phrase - "a stab beetle is easier to identify" ?!I actually thought that first determine, and only then kolyat or glue.
In general, I will say this-the die is aesthetically pleasing, the tattoo is practical.Choose one.But for me, the stab beetle is already losing its quality

I got some glued nutcrackers at the convention. It's very beautiful, prettier than my stabbed ones.
Only here I admired this beauty until the moment when I wanted to redefine one instance from the genus Agriotes. Immediately it became sad - without studying the bottom, you can not determine the appearance.
You can of course soak-peel off and see. And then glue it back on. And the next day again to peel and re-stick and so on several times (it is not always possible to determine immediately, sometimes I suffer with the copy for several days). In general, I scored on this instance. It is located in undefined areas. I also have a habit of comparing incoming instances with already defined ones. You can of course peel off, only with the impaled easier-took in the hand and just looked at the underside. I put it back in the box. Without numerous peels and glues.
However, I don't impose anything on anyone. Who likes what.

 
I've seen a pinned-up piece of change completely unfolded(and what are they going to look at when all the belly and cephalothorax are covered with paws) and the same thing on the dies-a sight to behold!
Of course, you can shout about practicality and stab beetles by the thousands, or you can talk about aesthetics and straighten each beetle!

Well, that's just not an argument! And I, for example, saw pasted on the triangles completely unfolded trifle-what is there aesthetics, and + the bottom is partially closed! Do not go to extremes: it has been repeatedly emphasized here: small things, of course, should be pasted (which was done from time immemorial). We are talking about medium and large-sized materials. You can also spread a pricked beetle beautifully, and examples of this were repeatedly displayed on the forum. The aesthetics and accuracy of the layout do not depend on the mounting method at all. They depend only on the skill, desire, and skills of the collector.

 
But for me, the stab beetle is already losing its quality

That's it. It (chopped) is no longer sold. That's how it all started.

This post was edited by Dmitrich - 03.12.2010 23: 34

FTOR, are you trolling? )))

For the rest:
you can glue in different ways, as well as prick. If the exmeplyar where the bottom is needed is completely filled in from the bottom, this is one thing, but when it is pasted on a small rectangle or triangle from the bottom, it does not interfere with anything. Let's separate the sticker and the full seal )) When we talk about a tattoo , we are talking about the fact that the beetle is pricked over the middle chest, evenly, and not in the head and at an angle of 60 degrees, right?
Therefore, the argument for sticking stickers in the subject is not appropriate.

Alex: beetle soaks usually slower than glue. You can throw it in water or in a very wet environment and as soon as the glue turns white, carefully remove the beetle and clean it from the glue-depending on how it is pasted, you can do this quickly and without much time and effort, and then prick or carefully stick it on a small triangle.

As for the sale, this is not the case. My collection is being selected without commercial interest. But what attracts me to my collection is the way it looks, the way it's set up, and I just get a lot of pleasure from looking at it, from working with the material, from sticking new material into boxes. I don't want to say that all my specimens are perfect, or that they're all perfectly straightened (I allow for a little sloppiness that appeals to me, and I allow for damaged beetles, but the general tendency is dizzy )

As the main argument for today:
Agyrtes castaneus, 4.5 mm

barbel, 2.5 mm

Corylophus cassidoides, ~0.9 mm

what can we say about large beetles?.

Well, if we are talking about sales/exchanges, then what kind of stickers and tattoos should we talk about?!In such cases, the beetle is sold/changed from mattresses or in a package.
For me, it would look like buying an impaled or glued beetle as " On you, God, that's not good for us."I note that this does not apply to butterflies.A fairly large percentage of "scales" collectors are already interested in the straightened material.
And if we are talking about large beetles,as Dmitrich said,about goliaths and similar ones in size,then not every cardboard box can withstand this.And here, too, I saw a very original solution-the beetle is attached to pins, but which do not pierce it(such a pin will probably resemble an electrode, or a hedgehog beetle), namely fix it.
Alex, get the nutcracker wet!And then pin it, since your entire collection is pinned

That's it. It (chopped) is no longer sold. That's how it all started.

That's it.He (the stabbed one) will not be bought or exchanged.This is where it all ends.

That's it.He (the stabbed one) will not be bought or exchanged.This is where it all ends.

First of all, for those of us who have not sold and are not selling-this is on the drum. Secondly, they will exchange it, and how much more! It's just that we have an exchange among similar" kolschiki " .

  
As the main argument for today:
Agyrtes castaneus, 4.5 mm

barbel, 2.5 mm

Corylophus cassidoides, ~0.9 mm

what can we say about large beetles?.

Great, Andrey! Only again the argument is not there and not about that: beetles of this size, as in your photos, I glue myself, where should I prick them? And in general, the sticker sticker discord: you're right - there is a neat gluing on the triangle-rectangle "under the side", and there is gluing even a relatively large beetle with its entire belly on the die. Personally, I speak out against, first of all, this, the second method of mounting material that is actively promoted now, preferring to prick large-sized beetles and medium-sized beetles in my home collection.

Didn't understand the phrase - "a stab beetle is easier to identify" ?!I actually thought that first determine, and only then kolyat or glue.

No, Pash. Usually, the meterial is first mounted, then they work with it (determine), IMHO, for several reasons. First, the mounted beetle is easier to fix in a certain position for viewing under binoculars. Secondly, imagine a situation - 200 beetles of presumably different species from any complex group are lying on a mattress in a desiccator, and you can spend several hours or even all day identifying one. And the rest are still in the desiccator, and when you get to the end of the first hundred, the second one will have time to rot