ENTOMOLOGICAL TAXIDERMY PROCESS TO REINFORCE THE EXOSKELETON OF COLLEOPTERA AND MINIMIZE THE FRAGILITY OF A SPECIMEN FOR ITS LATER USE IN DECORATIVE APPLICATIONS

Abstract

The present invention provides a mixture that serves for the preservation of Coleoptera to preserve its exoskeleton and its ornamental appearance; reinforce the exoskeleton of the coleopterous to minimize their fragility; improve the preservation of the insect by making an internal preparation that prevents rupture of the exoskeleton caused by blows, manipulation or pressure on it.

Claims

1. An entomological taxidermy process to reinforce the coleoptera exoskeleton comprising the following steps: i. Step I: Sectioning ii. Step II: Removal of entrails iii. Step III: Filling and Assembling iv. Step IV: Reincorporation of the elytra v. Step V: Drying vi. Step VI: Removal of limbs vii. Step VII: Final cleaning Characterized in that two mixtures are used to fill the exoskeleton: Marble and enamel powder (A) Cellulose and enamel (B).

2. An entomological taxidermy process to reinforce the coleoptera exoskeleton in accordance with claim 1 wherein the mixture to fill the exoskeleton is prepared by mixing two parts of marble powder with one part of enamel to make a thick mixture 2:1 (A); and a mixture of cellulose with the enamel (B).

3. An entomological taxidermy process to reinforce the coleoptera exoskeleton in accordance with claim 1 wherein the sectioning step separates the specimen into two simple sections: thorax Abdomen.

4. An entomological taxidermy process to reinforce the coleoptera exoskeleton in accordance with claim 1, wherein the entrail removal step must be sufficient and taking care not to perforate the exoskeleton.

5. An entomological taxidermy process to reinforce the coleoptera exoskeleton in accordance with claim 1, wherein the filling and assembly step is carried out as follows: i. Fill at least ¾ of the abdomen with the marble powder and enamel mixture, the amount to be introduced should be enough not to leave empty spaces. Fill with cellulose and enamel mixture until at least ¼ of the remaining abdominal space is filled and until the mixture is exposed. Mount the thorax to the abdomen, the union of the two parts of exoskeleton is produced by the exposed cellulose and enamel mixture; ii. Fill at least ⅔ of the thorax with the marble powder and enamel mixture. Subsequently fill at least ¼ of the thorax space with a cellulose and enamel mixture; leaving a sufficient amount exposed so that the thorax can fit with the head; iii. Fill the head with a cellulose and enamel mixture until a sufficient quantity of the mixture is exposed to fit with the thorax; iv. Fit the head of the Coleopterous with the thorax and press with slight force joining the three parts at least 10 to 60 seconds, preferably 45 seconds.

6. An entomological taxidermy process to reinforce the coleoptera exoskeleton in accordance with claim 1, wherein the step of reincorporation of the elytra is carried out as follows: i. Using a cellulose and enamel mixture, place in layers in the upper abdomen where the wings were and place a sufficient amount of mixture to obtain the thickness of the wings. ii. Reincorporate the elytra on the abdomen, respecting the anatomy.

7. An entomological taxidermy process to reinforce the coleoptera exoskeleton according to claim 1 wherein the drying step is carried out between 1 to 7 days, preferably 5 days.

8. An entomological taxidermy process to reinforce the coleoptera exoskeleton in accordance with claim 1 wherein the limb removal step is performed by applying light force on the limbs to manually remove the anterior, median and posterior limbs.

9. An entomological taxidermy process to reinforce the coleoptera exoskeleton in accordance with claim 1, wherein the final cleaning step is carried out as follows: i. Immerse the isotope in the solution of pink aniline (vegetable), glycerin, mineral oil, butyl acetate and rub the joints and any part where there is excess of the mixture ii. With the help of the removal tool, remove the excess of paper mixture that could be protruding from the joints, previously rubbing with the pink aniline (vegetable), glycerin, mineral oil, butyl acetate solution.

10. A coleopterous characterized in that its structure is reinforced by the procedure claimed in claim 1.

11. The use of a coleopterous according to claim 10 to be used in decoration of textiles, jewelry and decorative art.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0014] FIG. 1 shows the different parts of a coleopterous:

[0015] 1—Leg

[0016] 2—Head

[0017] 3—Thorax

[0018] 4—Elytra

[0019] 5—Wings

[0020] 6—Abdomen

[0021] FIG. 2 shows the three sections into which a coleopterous is sectioned: [0022] Head [0023] thorax [0024] Abdomen

[0025] FIG. 3 shows the separation of the elytra from the upper abdomen.

[0026] FIG. 4 shows the wings separation.

[0027] FIG. 5 shows the preparation of the marble powder and enamel mixture. Element 5.1 is marble powder and element 5.2 is enamel.

[0028] FIG. 6 shows how far the abdomen is filled with the marble powder and enamel mixture (A), as well as how the abdomen is filled with the cellulose and enamel mixture (B)

[0029] FIG. 7 shows how the thorax (3) is mounted to the abdomen (6).

[0030] FIG. 8 shows how the thorax is filled with the marble powder and enamel mixture and the cellulose and enamel mixture.

[0031] FIG. 9 shows the filling of the head with the cellulose and enamel mixture.

[0032] FIG. 10 shows the use of thin sheets of paper soaked in enamel (B), placed in layers in the upper abdomen where the wings were and emulating the thickness of the wings.

[0033] FIG. 11 shows the behavior of different samples when applying 1000 gF in the TA.XT Plus Texture Analyzer from Stable Micro Systems®.

[0034] FIG. 12 shows the coleopterous 1b analyzed by compression test with a TA.XT Plus Texture Analyzer from Stable Micro Systems®.

[0035] FIG. 13 shows the behavior of the different samples when applying 1000 gF in the TA.XT Plus Texture Analyzer from Stable Micro Systems®.

[0036] FIG. 14 shows the maximum strength (g) and hardness (g.Math.s) of the filled samples in relation to the calculated volume (mm3).

[0037] FIG. 15 shows the maximum strength (g) and hardness (g.Math.s) of the unfilled samples in relation to the calculated volume (mm3).

[0038] FIG. 16 shows the volume representation (mm3), maximum force (g) and hardness (g.Math.s) of each of the filled samples.

[0039] FIG. 17 shows the volume representation (mm3), maximum force (g) and hardness (g.Math.s) of each of the filled samples.

DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0040] In the present invention a process is described by means of which the exoskeleton of a coleopterous maintains the rigidity and firmness necessary to be manipulated without suffering any damage and maintaining its ornamental appearance.

[0041] For carrying out the present invention are used: [0042] Specimen of dry Coleoptera of the Buprestidae family. [0043] Separation, removal and filling tool that can be made of wood or polymer material of the type of a toothpick, since it facilitates the insertion of the material into the exoskeleton so that it does not cause any damage. [0044] Cellulose, which can be thin and soft sheet of paper, toilet paper or similar, cellulose pulp, among others, without being limiting. [0045] Marble Powder. [0046] Transparent enamel solution containing butyl acetate, ethyl acetate, isopropyl alcohol, copolymer hydrate, triphenyl phosphate, isobutanilic pentanyl, sterialconium, hectorite, nitrocellulose, formaldehyde, diacetone alcohol, citric acid, benzophenone, titanium dioxide. [0047] Cotton isotopes, toothpicks with cotton material tip.

[0048] Pink Aniline (vegetable) solution, glycerin, mineral oil, butyl acetate.

Process

[0049] FIG. 1 of the present invention shows the different parts of the exoskeleton of a Coleopterous of the Buprestidae family, specifically of a beetle which is going to be subjected to a process to improve its resistance and not suffer damage when manipulated.

Step I: Sectioning

[0050] 1—From a dry Coleoptera specimen of the Buprestidae family, separate the specimen into two simple sections respecting the morphology where the tissue joins the exoskeleton, ending with two parts: [0051] Thorax (3) [0052] Abdomen (6)

[0053] 2—As shown in FIG. 2, with the help of the separation tool such as a wooden toothpick, insert through the inside of the thorax and with a little pressure separate the head from the thoracic section.

[0054] This will give us a total of three separate sections of the Coleopterous of the Buprestidae family: [0055] Head (2) [0056] Thorax (3) [0057] Abdomen (6)

[0058] 3—Separate the elytra (4) from the upper abdomen as shown in FIG. 3 and remove the wings (5) as shown in FIG. 4, in order to leave the abdomen ready to undergo the process of removal and subsequent filling.

[0059] The sections at the end of step I must be: [0060] Head (2) [0061] Thorax (3) [0062] Abdomen (6) [0063] Elytra (4)

Step II: Removal of Entrails

[0064] With the help of the remover tool, remove the internal tissue of the three sections of the exoskeleton, this tissue is characterized by being the soft and dry part of the coleopterous, which will be extracted in powder form, the removal must be sufficient and taking the precaution of not perforating the exoskeleton.

Step III: Filling and Assembly

[0065] 1—Mix two parts of marble powder (FIG. 5/5.1) for one of enamel (FIG. 5/5.2) until making a thick mixture (A), that is, the ratio is 3:2. Fill ¾ of the inside of the insect abdomen with the mixture, the quantity to be introduced should be enough not to leave empty spaces (FIG. 6 item A).

[0066] 2—After the introduction of the marble powder and enamel mixture, the cellulose and enamel mixture will be introduced to the different parts of the exoskeleton through the entrance holes of each section of the Coleoptera of the Buprestidae family, the size of the cellulose should be such that it can be inserted through the holes.

[0067] 3—Prepare a mixture of cellulose with the enamel (B) to be introduced into the exoskeleton.

[0068] 4—Fill with the cellulose and enamel mixture (FIG. 6 element B) until filling at least ¼ of the abdomen remaining space and until the mixture is exposed (FIG. 6 element B) to be able to assemble the next section, the thorax (3) and in this way the parts are joined.

[0069] 5—Mount the thorax (3) to the abdomen (6), the union of the two parts of exoskeleton is achieved by the exposed cellulose and enamel mixture (FIG. 7).

[0070] 6—Once the abdomen (6) and the thorax (3) are joined, fill ⅔ of the thorax (3) with marble powder and enamel (FIG. 8) and fill the remaining space ¼ with a cellulose and enamel mixture; leaving a sufficient amount exposed so that the thorax (3) can fit with the head (2).

[0071] 7—Fill the head (2) with a cellulose and enamel mixture until a sufficient quantity is exposed to fit with the thorax (FIG. 9).

[0072] 8—Fit the insect head (2) with the thorax (3) and press with slight force joining the three parts at least 10 to 60 seconds, preferably 45 seconds.

Step IV: Reincorporation of the Elytra

[0073] 1—Use the cellulose and enamel mixture (FIG. 10 element B), place in layers in the upper abdomen where the wings were (5) and emulate the thickness of these, avoiding lateral overflow due to excess mixture.

[0074] 2—Reincorporate the elytra (4) on the abdomen (6), respecting the initial anatomy of the insect.

Step V: Drying

[0075] Once the assembly process is finished, the drying step follows, which is carried out between 1 to 7 days, preferably 5 days, for the correct drying of the marble powder and enamel mixture (A) and the cellulose and enamel mixture (B) inside the exoskeleton.

Step VI: Removal of Limbs

[0076] This step is optional and is performed by applying light force on the extremities to manually remove the anterior, medium and posterior limbs.

Step VII: Final Cleaning

[0077] 1—Immerse the isotope in the pink aniline (vegetable), glycerin, mineral oil, butyl acetate solution and rub the joints and any part where there is excess enamel, this can be identified by its opacity effect on the exoskeleton of the Coleoptera of the Buprestidae family.

[0078] 2—With the help of the removal tool, can be removed the excess of paper mixture that could be protruding from the joints, previously rubbing with the pink aniline (vegetable) solution, glycerin, mineral oil, butyl acetate and the isotope to soften it and to achieve the correct removal.

EXAMPLES

[0079] Ten coleopterous were analyzed, four without filling and six with different types of filling, to evaluate the force measured in g that they resist; Given the difference in sizes and shapes of the samples, the hardness measured in g.Math.s and the approximate volume of the abdomen of each sample were calculated to obtain a relationship between these characteristics, finding that the samples with filling presented considerably greater resistance than those without filling; analyzes were performed using the TA.XT Plus® Texture Analyzer from Stable Micro Systems®.

[0080] The hardness is a physical property of the materials that consists of the resistance to undergo a physical alteration, such as scratches or penetration, so it relates to rupture; the harder a material is, the stronger it will be.

Methodology

I. Identification and Photographic Record

[0081] The specimens were coded and photographed according to the number with which they had been identified since shipment, with the description shown below:

[0082] 1—Three Coleoptera filled with cellulose and varnish

[0083] 2—An unfilled Coleopterous

[0084] 3—Two unfilled Coleoptera

[0085] 4—A Coleopterous filled without filling (sic)

[0086] 5—Coleopterous filled with quick-drying mineral modeling paste

[0087] 6—Coleopterous filled with marble dust and varnish

[0088] 7—Coleopterous filled with acrylic. Those packages with 2 or 3 individuals, were assigned with letters a, b and even c, as appropriate.

II. Dimensions Record

[0089] Measurements were made of the section corresponding to the wings, which is the most prominent, and on which compression was performed, in three dimensions, identified as x, y1, y2 and z (FIG. 11). Only at number 7, it was measured including the thorax, for being more prominent than the wings.

III. Texture Analysis

[0090] Specimen compression tests were performed with a TA.XT Plus Texture Analyzer from Stable Micro Systems®, as shown in FIG. 12, under the following parameters:

[0091] Sequence Title: Return to Start (Set Dist)

[0092] Test Mode: Compression

[0093] Pre-Test Speed: 1.00 mm/sec

[0094] Test Speed: 0.50 mm/sec

[0095] Post-Test Speed: 10.00 mm/sec

[0096] T.A. Variable No: 5: 0.0 g

[0097] Target Mode: Strain

[0098] Distance: 2.0 mm

[0099] Strain: 10.0%

[0100] Trigger Type: Auto (Force)

[0101] Trigger Force: 100.0 g, 200.0 g, 500.0 g, 1000.0 g

[0102] Probe: P/25; 25 mm DIA CYLINDER ALUMINUM

[0103] Points per second: 500

[0104] Test Run by: LEAH

[0105] Compression was started with 100 g force and 10% deformation; later it was increased to 200 g, 500 g and 1000 g. At 1000 g, there was already fracture in the structure of some samples, so it no longer increased.

IV. Results and Discussion

1.—Identification

[0106]

[0107] The analyzed samples presented different sizes and shapes, so that the comparison between the treatments was not possible directly. Hence, the dimensions of the coleoptera abdomen were taken to calculate an approximate volume of it and to relate it to the applied force through the texture analysis.

2.—Texture Analysis

[0108] Table 2 shows the values obtained from the maximum force registered as “Peak Positive Force” (g) when applying a force of 1000 g, which was the one that presented the fracture of some samples, as well as the hardness, Registered as “Mean Area” or area under the curve (g*s), which, in the equipment software, is reported as “Hardness”. The shaded rows correspond to those that did not contain filling.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 2 Values corresponding to maximum force (g) and hardness (g.s) for each of the samples when applying 1000 gF. Sample Maximum force (g) Hardness (g.s) 1a 17 518.16 14 301.35 1b 28 858.16 24 763.38 1c  4 066.25  5 526.37 2 12 767.77  6 874.47 3a   648.94  1 072.43 3b   788.16  1 281.21 4  3 344.11  3 693.87 5 14 277.71 12 743.69 6 38 101.19 34 191.49 7 17 285.07 21 263.16

[0109] The graphs corresponding to these conditions, for all the samples, are shown in FIG. 13, where it can be seen that the highest peak with the largest area under curve, corresponds to sample 6, which is not that of higher volume, but it does contain a filler, while the smaller curves, which have the lowest values of strength and hardness, correspond to samples 3a and 3b (which were very similar), of small volume and did not contain filler. In addition, the irregularity of the line shows the fracturability that the samples presented when applying the force and that could also be identified by the sound that was produced.

[0110] FIG. 13 shows the behavior of the different samples when applying 1000 gF in the TA.XT Plus Texture Analyzer from Stable Micro Systems®.

[0111] In order to find a relationship that would be of better visual identification, the results were separated into two groups: those samples with filling and those that do not contain it, and scatter plots were generated relating the calculated volume with force and hardness (FIGS. 13 and 14), using the same scale for the two groups, for better comparison. In them, it can be seen that the unfilled sample that had the highest volume (13 834 mm3), resisted a force of 12 767 g to present a fracture, while that with a volume of 3 997 mm3, was the most resistant with a force of 38 101 g without fracture.

[0112] FIG. 14. Maximum force (g) and hardness (g.Math.s) of the filled samples in relation to the calculated volume (mm3). FIG. 15. Maximum force (g) and hardness (g.Math.s) of the samples without filling in relation to the calculated volume (mm3).

[0113] Likewise, bar graphs (FIGS. 16 and 17) were generated for each of the samples, to identify more easily, the relationship between volume (mm3), maximum force (g) and hardness (g.Math.s), separately those that contain filling and those without filling for a better appreciation of the values.

[0114] It can be seen that samples 3a and 3b showed a very similar behavior, because they were the only two Coleoptera that had almost equal dimensions and appeared to be of the same species. Unfortunately both lacked filler, since a better comparison of filler could have been made if one of them had contained it.

[0115] FIG. 16. Volume representation (mm3), maximum force (g) and hardness (g.Math.s) of each of the filled samples. FIG. 17. Volume representation (mm3), maximum force (g) and hardness (g.Math.s) of each of the filled samples.

[0116] In a typical texture analysis, the size, shape and structure of the samples are the cause of variability in the results. The obtained values are relative to the nature of each sample.

[0117] Using this analysis, it was not possible to make an accurate comparison between a filled and an unfilled sample because the Coleoptera were not equal in size and shape, so the approximate volume of the abdomen was calculated to relate it to the maximum force that they supported and the calculated hardness.

[0118] It can be seen graphically that, in proportion, the strength and hardness of the coleoptera is considerably increased in those that have filling, with the filling of samples 6 and 7 showing the greatest increase.