Destructive or invasive and non-destructive sampling and analysis
of collection items
Guidelines for museums*
Compiled by Tracey Seddon, National Museums Liverpool, in consultation with Dr Steve
Ashby,University of York, Dr Julie Eklund, University of Oxford and Dr Joanna Ostapkowicz,
National Museums Liverpool.
*The term ‘museum’ is used in these guidelines to denote any holding institution with
guardianship of historic cultural or scientific material.
Introduction
The museum community is encouraged to facilitate the use of collections in as
many ways as possible for the advancement of scientific and cultural study.
However, as many study techniques involve destructive or otherwise invasive
procedures, museums need to evaluate requests for sampling in a way which
balances the benefits of current and future analyses with the preservation of
items in the collections. The following represents recommendations and
guidelines intended to ensure that the needs of both contemporary and future
users of collections are equally taken into account.
Procedure






Requests for sampling or analysis should be made in writing.
The applicant should supply a detailed research proposal, including
methodology, research aims and objectives and a justification of the
quantity of sample required, supported by any relevant publications they
have authored. Undergraduate students must provide a letter of support
from their supervisor, a copy of their CV, details of qualifications and any
previous relevant experience.
The museum should respond in writing, agreeing or declining the request,
including reasons for declining.
A record of any request for sampling and analysis and the subsequent
approval or refusal, should be kept in the item’s file.
The application and monitoring procedures, terms and conditions should
apply to any researchers, including staff of the museum.
The applicant should be informed at the outset of any fees they may be
charged.
Evaluation of requests for destructive or invasive sampling

Each application, including additional or repeated requests for samples
from the same item, should be considered on its own merits.













Each application should be reviewed by all relevant staff of the museum,
including curators, conservators and heads of department as necessary, to
ensure clear checks and transparency of procedure.
It may be helpful to consider the following criteria:
 Scientific, historical and cultural importance of the items to be sampled
 Rarity of the items to be sampled
 Condition of the items requested
 Potential damage to the items caused by the sampling
 Needs of both present and future users
 Legal and ethical issues that relate to items to be sampled
 The potential significance of any results generated by the proposed
research
 Techniques to be used and consideration of any alternative techniques
Does the applicant have the appropriate background and experience to
undertake the proposed work reliably? Can he/she demonstrate a
rationale for their chosen method of analysis?
If the technique is destructive, contaminating or requires material to be
removed from items are there alternative, less invasive techniques which
would give equally useful information?
What other useful techniques could be applied to the same sample,
instead or as well as the one proposed, to gain further information with no
more damage to the item?
Could the same work be equally well undertaken using a similar item of
lower value or rarity or by using items from other collections?
What size sample is requested? Is this sufficient to be useful without
being excessive?
Where will the sample(s) be taken from on the item? What will be the level
of impact on the item for aesthetic, research and display purposes?
Who will take the sample? How? Where will this take place? Whether the
researcher is given permission to undertake sampling or whether it will be
done by an appointed member of museum staff will be at the discretion of
the museum.
Will the item need to be loaned for sampling/analysis? If so, will standard
loan procedures apply?
What is the likelihood of a successful result from the analysis?
What is the likelihood of publication, bearing in mind that this need not be
a stipulation of an agreement to sample?
Could a request for sampling be approved by the museum in principle,
pending adequate funding, as this might be in the interest of both parties?
Removal and treatment of sample material

Samples taken should be of a sufficient size and from a suitable location to
enable useful investigation.
 The size and site of samples taken should be documented clearly
including the use of before and after photographs.
 Key data associated with the item (eg identification number) should be
kept with the sample.

Removal of sample material should not prevent standard measurements
from being taken in future.
 Any unused sample material having potential for future study should be
returned to the collection within one year of completion of the project and
kept for future reference. Alternatively, should the museum agree to such
material being kept elsewhere, it must be kept in appropriate conditions,
adequately labelled and documented, to be accessed and used in the
future only by the museum, or with its permission.
 Unused material should not be used for future analysis or passed to a third
party without the permission of the museum.
 In the case of DNA sampling, sequences should be deposited with the
GenBank/European Molecular Biology Lab.
Publication and feedback








Any stipulation or agreement as to whether results should be passed to
the museum as soon as available or whether feedback can be closer to the
publication date should be made clear at the start of the project. In most
instances feedback should be expected sooner rather than later.
Information should be included on the relevance of the data. A minimum
requirement is a short written statement on the findings and their
significance, presented in a form that is readily digestible and useable.
A copy of any resulting publication and full analytical data should be
submitted to the museum as soon as available.
The museum should withhold from disseminating any details of sequence
data, novel protocols and procedures until the work is published.
If the work is not published then a report detailing methods, results or lack
of results, and any conclusions should be given to the museum within a
reasonable period.
Researchers should provide a brief annual status report to the museum
until the project is completed.
Appropriate acknowledgement of the museum and staff must be made in
publications. For deposition of DNA sequences at the GenBank the
source of the data must be cited appropriately.
If the project is abandoned before completion of the work the applicant
must notify the museum and return all samples.
Intellectual Property Rights

The museum should aim to retain intellectual property rights associated
with museum specimens and samples taken from them, including to DNA
sequences.