|
Post by Jommayca on Aug 21, 2020 8:06:33 GMT
Once upon a time people spread across this great land resulting in the civilized people living in the East and the losers drifting west until a lot of water put a sudden halt to the drifting. One day some people in the west realized that they didn't have ANY EASTERN BUGS so panic began to spread....we are trying to make buildings where people learn stuff and how do we turn this bug thing into a science with degrees and stuff if we ain't got eastern bugs or Europe bugs or or or?
Fortunately in the civilized east there were folks willing to tackle this problem. For example taxidermists thought I stuff/preserve elephants, birds, any animal with fur so how hard could stuffing a bug be? It was hard but if you ever hung with a taxidermist yo know how stubborn they can be so they stabbed the bugs, used chemicals on the bugs but finally settled on putting the bugs in a box with a fancy name....Riker Mounts....la de da
Anyway soon you had Wards, Angell & Cash, American Entomological Company along with many others sending specimens in Riker Mounts to the west so they could be educated. Pretty soon in the west people were researching and collecting so they could have west bugs and east bugs in those buildings where people learn stuff and pretty soon they learned so much they had bug degrees and professions and museums so they didn't need the nice specimen dealers from the east as much
The moral of the story is Riker Mounts played a HUGE role in the growth and development of what ya got going on today...like it or not
Now the ol US of A government like the new US of A government was usually 10-15 years behind everyone else so in the 30's so they used Riker Mounts to send out examples of whatever nefarious bugs were nesferian along with wood. leaf damage samples ect.
" There has been a constant demand for educational mounts showing the characteristic symptoms of the disease and specimens of it's principal known insect vector. This has been met by distribution of Mounts containing well-labeled specimens of sterilized elm wood showing characteristic streaking together with specimens of Scolytus multistriatus Marsh and examples of this beetle's engravings"
This be one of those Mounts ........
text on item: Dutch elm disease eradication, United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, Field Headquarters, Glenwood Ave. & Henry St., Bloomfield, New Jersey. Wilting and yellowing, with partial defoliation, are the primary external symptoms of the Dutch elm disease. Graphium ulmi, the causal agent, produces a brown discoloration in the spring wood and cambial region. It is necessary to isolate the causal fungus to identify the disease. Specimens cut from wilted trees and showing discoloration should be sent to the above address. The European elm bark beetle, Scolytus multistriatus, is a carrier of G. ulmi. The adults and larvae make characteristic tunnels under the bark of weak trees. The beetles feed in the crotches of elm twigs and may thus introduce the fungus into healthy elms.
It is a Photomechanical Print: A photomechanical print is a mechanical reproduction of a photo image that is printed in ink, often by a printer's press. Photomechanical prints are not the product of a photographic process; their supports are not light-sensitive, and light plays no direct role in image production. Instead, the image has been impressed or transferred mechanically from a inked plate or other surface, which has been created using a photographic negative as its image source. Unlike photographic prints, photomechanical prints generally do not display signs of image fading. With the exception of the woodburytype, they can be identified by distinctive patterns under magnification.
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Aug 21, 2020 9:35:37 GMT
I appreciate the photo and the corresponding educational explanation involving its topic. The explanation regarding the nature of the photomechanical print is also interesting and appreciated.
However, the condescending manner in which you chose to start off the history of the GREAT ol'e Riker mount is honestly "insulting" to the intelligence of every one here ! You are not speaking to children AND you are not telling us some "bedtime story" like some old Uncle Joe.
Riker mounts may have (in their day) served as able educational platforms on myriad subjects. They were acceptable if all you needed them for was to show your 5th grade or 8th grade class a grouping of local self caught butterflies or some purchased Ward mount of "Eastern U.S. butterflies". Again, they were still a poor but, affordable option for those without the means to purchase better equipment or those who did not feel the need for proper housing of that which they worked so hard at accumulating.
Unless stored in a good sealing cabinet which could be fumigated with naphthalene regularly your (Lepidoptera) treasures if left out in the open would succumb to dermestid beetles in time, or the glass might get broken, or if exposed to light your leps would be "blank pages void of color" in no time !
By the way, Schmitt boxes and museum drawers were in use by museums and major big name collectors like W. J. Holland; LONG ...... before the Riker mount was even conceived --- much less sold as a cheap educational/ housing commodity.
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Aug 21, 2020 14:52:23 GMT
I think it was attempt to be humorous not condescending.
Everyone I know started with Riker mounts. That’s what was available and affordable to the common man. Cornell and other drawers were both exotic and expensive, only for museums. So typically a collectors first foray into glass cases were various sizes made by Grandpa from scrap wood.
The economic boom of the 1970s provided more discretionary cash, mass printing of Wards catalogs made knowledge of the existence of standardized glass cases even “common” knowledge, and between the two more serious young citizen scientists were able to transition to Cornell and other drawer.
But for novice and cash strapped students of sciences the Riker mount remains the storage option.
Chuck
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Aug 21, 2020 17:12:52 GMT
Well, that is a "strange" sort of humor (if that's what one calls it). Once you get past the absurd approach of the article the rest is informative...
Yes, Riker mounts served their purpose well for novices and folks of limited monetary means. However, there were other affordable options (as mentioned: Schmitt boxes); which filled the vast void between the cost of rikers and the far more expensive and (largely out of reach) insect drawers utilized by wealthy collectors and museums.
Way back in the 30's and up to the end of the 60's rikers might have only cost you 1 to 3 bucks a piece in "relative" monetary terms; however, for just a few " bucks" more (probably 6 to 9 bucks) one could purchase a tight-fitting durable wooden Schmitt box (sold by various outfits). These would hold your pinned treasures, would accept a very small box to hold a moth ball, and were compact enough for easy storage in a fumigated cabinet.
Maybe, still not as cheap as rikers overall but, far more advisable if you were a TRUE collector/ enthusiast of limited monetary means.
|
|
|
Post by Paul K on Aug 21, 2020 19:07:29 GMT
In my opinion Rikers are not really cheap alternative to regular drawer. Pinned specimens can be shingled and more can be squeezed in to a drawer, in Rikers that is impossible.
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Aug 21, 2020 23:29:33 GMT
For those European collectors/enthusiasts unfamiliar with "Schmitt boxes" I provide below a couple of pictures. These are very similar to the insect "Storeboxes" offered by Watkins/Doncaster, Paradox, and so on... The dimensions are not quite as long or wide as those made in Europe however, they are very tight fitting and suit pinned specimens admirably. Many a "serious" collector/enthusiast utilized these for the proper protection, curation, and compact storage of their treasured insect captures. These were a bit "pricier" than what you would pay for Riker mounts but, really for just "a few dollars more" the overall return outweighed the glass "exposure" rikers provided as well as the lack of a truly good closure which rikers never had. Again, these spanned the gulf between low end cost Riker mounts and quite expensive (if you could get them) insect drawers. As I mentioned, serious minded enthusiasts preferred these if drawers were financially unaffordable. A case in point exists here in these photographs. The pictures which you see here are of a Schmitt box (I have 10 like this) which once belonged to Professor Josef N. Knull (1891-1975). Professor Knull was, and is, an icon among North American beetle collectors. To students of North American Buprestidae, (as well as other groups he worked on -- Cerambycidae for example) the name Josef Knull is as familiar as Carl Linnaeus, or Charles Darwin. A Professor of Entomology at Ohio State University from 1934-1962, Knull published nearly 200 papers on the taxonomy, biology, and distribution of these and other families of beetles. He personally housed his private collection in over 200 boxes (as pictured). And the handwritten labels which you see on the outside and inside of the box are HIS handwriting. The arrangement within the box is all ORIGINAL to his desired separations of species/subspecies... These were fully curated, organized, and stacked in cabinets in Professor Knull's study. The man had incredibly "symmetrical" handwriting ! Red labels within indicate either new species or subspecies added to Professor Knull's collection. The fumigant box is of his choosing and is painted red all around the sides. This box remains original and absolutely intact as he arranged it so many moons ago ! Of coarse, the priceless specimens found their new home at the museum where I once worked for 8 years. Professor Knull's collection was bequeathed upon his passing to Field Museum (Chicago). He described 233 species and subspecies of beetles in his time here. My point is that even a legendary entomologist like Professor Knull found these affordable and completely practical for his collection which spanned over 40 years. I acquired 10 of his empty boxes while at the museum when it was decided our division would likely never use them; so they were eventually handed out to kids as "storeboxes for things" over a couple of our member nights. I placed an Inachis io in this one to show that indeed these would comfortably hold Lepidoptera as well as any other insects.
|
|
jhyatt
Aurelian
Posts: 224
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jhyatt on Aug 22, 2020 15:27:33 GMT
Apropos' to Riker mounts: Below are two photos of a very old Riker which contains a short series of Bolorias from Mt. Adams, NH, taken on 14 July, 1938 by A. J. Dennis: imgur.com/zwkRPeJimgur.com/Zz7D432Mr. Dennis was a disabled WWI veteran who lived in Beulah, Manitoba (d. 1947). He collected from as early as 1898 until shortly before his death; he exchanged widely and apparently sold specimens as well. His collection is housed in homemade Riker mounts. The mount size was not standardized; each one is made to fit the specimens. Data is on the back beneath each specimen. Dennis' collection was in large part purchased by the Manitoba Museum in late 1946, but a number of Rikers remained in the hands of his descendants. Some of these were obtained by John H. "Jack" Masters; I purchased about 15 of these when buying part of Master's collection about 15 years ago. Although the mounts are not taped or sealed, there is absolutely no Dermestid damage; I've opened a couple of mounts to pin specimens and they're perfectly sound, 80 years since mounting. Dennis had placed a 1/4" square of thin cardboard beneath each bug body; I presume that these contained a pesticide (nicotine? arsenic? Not sure what one would have used in the 1930's, but it has worked well!). For more info on Dennis and his collection, including a species list, see: J. H. Masters,"The Collection of Butterflies Made by Jack Dennis at Beulah, Manitoba", J. Lep. Soc. 27 (1), 33-39 (1973). Cheers, JH
|
|
jhyatt
Aurelian
Posts: 224
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jhyatt on Aug 22, 2020 15:39:18 GMT
A couple more notes about important collections in Riker mounts:
The late Irving Finkelstein of Atlanta had a very extensive Lepidoptera collection, now located in the McGuire center. His collection was all in large, uniform-sized Rikers housed in a long row of metal file cabinets. I never saw any problems of pest damage, fading, etc, in any of his wonderfully curated collection.
The late Malcolm Barcant collected butterflies on his home island of Trinidad for about 50 years, and in the 1970's published a large book on the butterflies of Trinidad. He had everything in Riker mounts; he said that in his humid tropical climate pinned specimens often sagged or drooped on pins, but stayed perfectly spread in Rikers. The last I heard, his collection is on display at the headquarters of the Angostura Bitters Company, which was his family business.
Cheers, jh
|
|
jhyatt
Aurelian
Posts: 224
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jhyatt on Aug 22, 2020 15:42:07 GMT
Let me try again to post the photos of the sample homemade Riker from the A. J. Dennis collection:
jh
|
|
jhyatt
Aurelian
Posts: 224
Country: U.S.A.
|
Post by jhyatt on Aug 22, 2020 15:45:23 GMT
Still didn't work. Guess I need to re-study the directions... sorry! jh
|
|
|
Post by jshuey on Aug 22, 2020 18:45:15 GMT
I think that these educational riker mounts were very popular in the past - like 1950's through the 80's. When I was at the Ohio State (mid 80's), we teaching assistants had access to over 100 different riker preparations covering various topics - often economic pest oriented, but also basic taxonomy, life histories and so on. They were generally a mix of text, with photos and actual insects - often the insects were in "blown-glass" sealed tubes but sealed in the rikers as well. Some were commercially purchased (like from Wards), but others were made at tOSU for specific classes. Basically these were hands-on educational materials that were almost indestructible and were intended as a supplement to lab exercises. I used them a bit, but I was lucky in that I never had to TA intro-ent courses and I was definitely not an economic-ent kinda guy. So, not so much for the classes I TAed.
The other interesting thing that tOSU had, was hundreds of wet specimens in those blown-glass tubes that students could handle directly without damaging the bugs. Oh, one or two were totally destroyed each year, but as long as you did not drop them, they lasted forever. As opposed to the short-lived pinned bugs that students also used for basic taxonomy, which had to be replenished every few years. These tubes were made in-house at tOSU in the 30's and 40's according to my advisor.
John john
|
|
|
Post by Adam Cotton on Aug 22, 2020 19:55:38 GMT
Still didn't work. Guess I need to re-study the directions... sorry! jh I moved the links to below the text and tried to format them to display in the post, but at least someone can click them to see the photos. Adam.
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Aug 22, 2020 22:29:12 GMT
I do feel that when Rikers are used in an educational context they work well as excellent visual tools with informative description. The example which dunes started off the thread with was pretty cool, well done, and informative.
As for them being used for a collection they are just fine for novices and those with a limited interest in insects. However, if in time you become a more "serious" minded enthusiast; then I think as your experiance and knowledge evolves you need to "step-up" your means of storing your hard won specimens to better equipment.
|
|
|
Post by Jommayca on Aug 22, 2020 23:15:28 GMT
Thank you jhyatt and jshuey for your input.....
My perspective is formed by the fact I'm a 30 year old business woman who deals in antiques & RARE items. I am not an insect collector so the debate of what ya should use for storage nowadays or serious people used this poor lazy non-serious folk used that then or now has no relevance to me when determining a current money value and they do have a current money value.....perhaps not to anyone here but as antique/vintage items if accompanied with provenance, very good condition, fun to view and are directly connected to a good story or event/person of accomplishment they they'll often if not always have value to someone for some reason
For example I have Texas Fever Ticks taken from Longhorn cattle and a chipmunk in 1865,,,,there is much interest in these ticks from some people in Texas who have no interest in insects but want to be the owner of 155 year old Texas Ticks cause Bob down the road ain't got any 155 year ol Ticks from a longhorn or chipmunk... I have no knowledge of how they were stored previously but in the early 1900's they were put into a Rikers Mount
I'm here because I've become fascinated by the art, the historical importance and the wonderful stories/accomplishments of those who were the contributors to developing what exists today,,,,,I have no interest in promoting, exalting, selling Riker Mounts but do have a have an interest in learning or discussing or sharing
It's all about the viewing from a condition, historical, rarity/antique perspective for me and so far it's been a pleasure to research what I do have because it's a fascinating topic/subject
So again...Thanks
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Aug 23, 2020 1:36:53 GMT
My father has 60 YO butterflies in Riker mounts in their bedroom and hallway. Limited sun exposure, so they retained a vast majority of color. At least he sees his beautiful butterflies every day. Sometimes we got lost in the science and overlook the wonder.
I have some Rikers compiled by Wards to demonstrate mimicry, life cycle, etc. they are perfect for school science fairs and educational displays.
And I have one of my own with cecropia all from one brood. Why waste a Cornell?
I use Schmidt boxes for temporary storage until seasonal specimens can be properly collated.
BTW as a kid I lived five miles from Wards. Needless to say, when I got in there I was in awe. Fossils, insect, skeletons (human too), minerals, etc. it was incredible
Chuck
|
|