JAIC 1986, Volume 25, Number 2, Article 7 (pp. 109 to 109)
JAIC online
Journal of the American Institute for Conservation
JAIC 1986, Volume 25, Number 2, Article 7 (pp. 109 to 109)



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR


1.1 To the Editor:

In reference to the article by J. H. Haines and S. A. Kohler, “An evaluation of Ortho-Phenyl Phenol as a fungicidal fumigant for archives and libraries,” JAIC 25(1986):49-551:

I would like to point out that Deborah Nagin and Michael McCann in their article “Thymol and O-Phenyl Phenol: Safe work Practices”, published in a data sheet from Centre for Occupational Hazards, N. Y. 1982, recommended the replacement of thymol with ortho-phenyl phenol(OPP) for humidification chambers, thymol/alcohol baths, thymol-impregnated sheets, starch pastes but not for the thymol fumigation chamber. Thus the reference in the Haines-Kohler article stating substitution in all applications is incorrect.

The use of OPP as a fumigant is really illogical. The vapour pressure, boiling point, and melting point are very different from thymol which explains why in Table 2. only 0.7 grams of OPP was evaporated in 10 days whereas with thymol 8.30 grams was evaporated.

Both of these points were brought to the attention of the authors through a phone call to them which I made on April 30, 1984.

In reference to my work in testing the thymol chamber for fungicidal efficiency, the tests I ran showed that with my specific chamber, number of lights and amount of thymol used, length of exposure and the specific organisms used, that the method was fungicidal. The authors of this article should have continued with variable parameters to determine a method for their chamber which was fungicidal, then comparisons could be made.

Yours sincerely

Mary-Lou E.FlorianConservation Scientist, British Columbia Provincial Museum, Parliament Buildings, Victoria, British Columbia V8V 1X4


Copyright 1986 American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works