Correlating Additives to Deterioration and Assessing the Effectiveness of Acrylic Coatings for the Protection of Rubber

Conservators have long been aware of the problems associated with the preservation of rubber objects due to inherent instability that can be attributed, in part, to the presence of additives. Inorganic additives, such as fillers, accelerators, stabilizers, and special ingredients are necessary in manufacturing to alter the properties of natural rubber. These materials all have different interactions with the rubber, and each other, and differing effects on the ageing process. To date, the most effective and accepted methods to preserve rubber are cold, dark storage of objects, or the use of low oxygen environments. While these methods are effective, they greatly limit access. The application of coatings to the surface of rubber objects can slow deterioration and greatly increase the ability of an institution to handle and display rubber objects. While numerous coatings for preventive and interventive treatment have been tested, none have been so successful to warrant routine use. The first section of this research highlighted the relationship between the inclusion of certain additives in natural rubber objects and the accelerated or slowed down overall degradation. In the second part of this research, the acrylic varnishes Golden Polymer Varnish with UVLS, Lascaux Acrylic Transparent Varnish-UV, Sennelier Matte Lacquer with UV Protection, and Liquitex Soluvar Varnish containing ultraviolet light absorbers or stabilizers were tested as a preventative coating for rubber. Through testing the visual and physical properties of the samples, as well as compound analysis the results of this research suggest that acrylic varnishes do provide protection, each to varying degrees. The results also provided insight into the behavior of rubber and these varnishes with continuing light exposure.

Evaluating Spirulina as a protein source in Nile Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) grow-out diets

Aquaculture growth has intensified the need for a diversification of nutritionally appropriate aquafeed ingredients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate Spirulina, a blue-green microalgae, and soybean meal as the sole protein sources in grow-out Tilapia diets. We constructed 3 experimental diets with soybean meal and 0,15, 30, and 45% Spirulina (SBM, SP15, SP30, and SP45 respectively) as their main protein sources. We compared these diets to a commercial Tilapia diet (CC). Additionally, to evaluate the benefit of fishmeal inclusion, fishmeal was added (2 and 10%) to the most successful Spirulina containing diet (FM2, FM10). We evaluated these experimental diets based on their physical properties, palatability, growth potential, waste production, and overall cost. No significant differences in growth performance were found between any of the diets. Total ammonia nitrogen (TAN) and total phosphorus (TP) levels in each tank were significantly affected by diet (p<0.05). CC had significantly higher TP than the experimental diets and SP15 had significantly higher TAN than the other diets. Only CC was found to be significantly more palatable than the experimental diets, and Spirulina inclusion was inversely correlated to pellet stability. Lastly, SP15 was the most profitable experimental diet. We recommend eliminating fishmeal from grow-out Tilapia diets in favour of soybean meal and Spirulina. Spirulina should, however, be limited to 15% to avoid the negative effects it has on stability and profitability, and its possible effect on feed intake.