Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-fmk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-16T21:14:44.943Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Advantages and Limitations of the Ninhydrin Test for Analysis of Historic Wool Fibers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Nancy Kerr
Nancy Kerr*
Affiliation:
Department of Human Ecology, 301 Printing Services Building, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G 2N1
Get access

Abstract

There are very few quantitative tests suitable for measuring the degradation of historic wools and silks. Most tests are qualitative and results are confounded by variations in fiber diameter. The ninhydrin test, in which ninhydrin (triketohydrinene hydrate) reacts with primary amino groups and produces Ruhemann's purple, is a well known test for amino acids in solution. The test has been modified by researchers in order to give a quantitative measure of primary amino groups in wool and silk fibers. The primary amino group content of new wool is compared with wool degraded by moist heat and several archaeological wools. Some of the advantages of the ninhydrin tests include 1) an analytical procedure for quantitative work 2) small sample size and 3) equipment commonly available in an analytical laboratory. One limitation of the test is the fact that ninhydrin reacts not only with (α + ɛ) amino groups but also with ammonia nitrogen and other free amines. In addition, archaeological and historic protein fibers are often contaminated with soil residues which are difficult to remove and will influence tests results.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 352: Symposium – Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology IV , 1995 , 233
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Research Priorities in Art and Architectural Conservation, edited by Hansen, E.F. and Reedy, C. (American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works, Philadelphia, 1994), pp. 105–122.Google Scholar
2. Merkel, R.S., in Analytical Methods for a Textile Laboratory, 3rd ed., edited by Weaver, J.W. (American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1984), pp. 57–69.Google Scholar
3. Amino Acid Determination, edited by Blackburn, S. (Marcel Dekker, New York, 1978), p. 90.Google Scholar
4. Maclaren, J.A. and Milligan, B., Wool Science: The Chemical Reactivity of the Wool Fibre, (Science Press, Marrickville, Australia, 1981), p. 261; ibid., pp. 283-284.Google Scholar
5. Moore, S. and Stein, W.H., J. Biol. Chem. 176, pp. 367–388 (1948).Google Scholar
6. Moore, S. and Stein, W.H., J. Biol. Chem. 211, pp. 907–913 (1954).Google Scholar
7. Rosen, H., Berard, C.W. and Levenson, S., Analytical Biochemistry 4, pp. 213–221 (1962).Google Scholar
8. Friedman, M. and Williams, L.D., Analytical Biochemistry 54, pp. 333–345 (1973).Google Scholar
9. Knott, J., Grandmaire, M. and Thelen, J., J. Text. Inst. 1981, pp. 19–25.Google Scholar
10. Kuruppillai, R.V., Hersh, S.P. and Tucker, P.A. in Historic Textile and Paper Materials: Conservation and Characterization, ACS Symposium Series 212, edited by Needles, H.L. and Zeronian, S.H. (American Chemical Society, Washington DC, 1986), pp. 111–127.Google Scholar
11. Becker, M.A., MSc thesis, North Carolina State University, 1988.Google Scholar
12. Peacock, E.E., PhD thesis, the Victoria University of Manchester, 1993.Google Scholar
13. Chavan, R.B. and Nalankilli, G., Indian J. of Fibre & Textile Research 18, pp. 129–134 (1993).Google Scholar
14. Speakman, P.T., in Handbook of Fiber Science and Technology IV: Fiber Chemistry, edited by Lewin, M. and Pearce, E.I., (Marcel Dekker, New York, 1985), pp. 617–625.Google Scholar
15. Carr, D.S. and Harris, B.L., J. of Industrial Engin. Chem. 41, pp. 2014–2015 (1949).Google Scholar
16. CAN/CGSB-4.2 no. 9:4-M91, National Standard of Canada Textile Test Methods, (Canadian General Standards Board, Ottawa, 1991).Google Scholar
17. Hersh, S.P., Tucker, P.A. and Becker, M.A. in Archaeological Chemistry IV, ACS Symposium Series 220), edited by Allen, R.O., (American Chemical Society, Washington DC, 1989), pp. 427–449.Google Scholar
18. Steinhardt, J. and Fugitt, C.H. in Handbook of Textile Fibers, edited by Harris, M. (Harris Research Laboratories, Washington DC, 1954), p. 228.Google Scholar
19. Wang, C. and Pailthorpe, M.T., Text. Res. J. 59, pp. 671–675 (1989).Google Scholar
20. Morrison, R.T. and Boyd, R.N., Organic Chemistry, 2nd ed. (Allyn and Bacon, Boston, 1966), pp. 741–743.Google Scholar
21. D'Aniello, A., Onofrio, G., Pischetola, M. and Strazzulo, L., Analytical Biochemistry 144, p. 610 (1985).Google Scholar