Benefits and Limitations of Three-Dimensional Printing Technology for Ecological Research
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Behm et al. BMC Ecol (2018) 18:32 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12898-018-0190-z BMC Ecology METHODOLOGY ARTICLE Open Access Benefts and limitations of three‑dimensional printing technology for ecological research Jocelyn E. Behm1,2* , Brenna R. Waite1,3, S. Tonia Hsieh4 and Matthew R. Helmus1 Abstract Background: Ecological research often involves sampling and manipulating non-model organisms that reside in heterogeneous environments. As such, ecologists often adapt techniques and ideas from industry and other scientifc felds to design and build equipment, tools, and experimental contraptions custom-made for the ecological systems under study. Three-dimensional (3D) printing provides a way to rapidly produce identical and novel objects that could be used in ecological studies, yet ecologists have been slow to adopt this new technology. Here, we provide ecolo- gists with an introduction to 3D printing. Results: First, we give an overview of the ecological research areas in which 3D printing is predicted to be the most impactful and review current studies that have already used 3D printed objects. We then outline a methodological workfow for integrating 3D printing into an ecological research program and give a detailed example of a success- ful implementation of our 3D printing workfow for 3D printed models of the brown anole, Anolis sagrei, for a feld predation study. After testing two print media in the feld, we show that the models printed from the less expensive and more sustainable material (blend of 70% plastic and 30% recycled wood fber) were just as durable and had equal predator attack rates as the more expensive material (100% virgin plastic). Conclusions: Overall, 3D printing can provide time and cost savings to ecologists, and with recent advances in less toxic, biodegradable, and recyclable print materials, ecologists can choose to minimize social and environmen- tal impacts associated with 3D printing. The main hurdles for implementing 3D printing—availability of resources like printers, scanners, and software, as well as reaching profciency in using 3D image software—may be easier to overcome at institutions with digital imaging centers run by knowledgeable staf. As with any new technology, the benefts of 3D printing are specifc to a particular project, and ecologists must consider the investments of developing usable 3D materials for research versus other methods of generating those materials. Keywords: 3D models, Additive manufacturing, Anolis sagrei, Clay model, Curaçao, Maya autodesk, Sustainability Background [2]; seed tags [3]), catching animals (pit-less pitfall traps Ecologists exhibit exceptional creativity and ingenuity [4]), containing or restraining difcult-to-hold speci- in designing new tools and equipment for their studies, mens (squeeze box for venomous snakes [5], ovagram often incorporating and repurposing technology from for amphibian eggs [6]), and remotely collecting data or other felds. For example, unique solutions have been samples (frog logger [7]; hair trap [8]), among countless devised for tracking animals (backpack-mounted radio others. Because many ecological studies require custom- transmitters [1]), tracking seeds (fuorescent pigments ized equipment, ecologists are no strangers to building the contraptions necessary for conducting their research, *Correspondence: [email protected] and the weeks leading up to and during feld seasons and 1 Integrative Ecology Lab, Center for Biodiversity, Department of Biology, lab experiments often involve multiple trips to hardware Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA stores and craft shops. Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s) 2018. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/ publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. Behm et al. BMC Ecol (2018) 18:32 Page 2 of 13 Despite the high level of creativity and adaptability sand in ways that are impossible with a living lizard’s exhibited by ecologists, there is one technology that ecol- respiratory system [14]. In studies of fuid dynamics, 3D ogists have been slower to adopt relative to other felds: printed models of swift (Apus apus) wings and bodies three-dimensional (3D) printing. Additive layer manu- of echolocating bat species permitted tests in water and facturing, or 3D printing, is the layering of material by wind tunnels respectively to understand how morphol- a computer-controlled machine tool to create an object ogy infuences species’ movements [15, 16]. In other from a digital fle that defnes its geometry [9]. Most applications, biomechanical theory is tested by attaching objects are printed in plastic, but newer print materials 3D printed structures to robots. In a study of underwa- such as metal, wood, or other composites are increas- ter burrowing mimetics in bivalves, Germann et al. [17] ingly common in consumer applications. In the recent used mathematical models to design a bivalve shell which past (i.e., before 2010), 3D printing was cost-prohibitive was 3D printed and incorporated into a burrowing robot. and limited in availability, but it is now afordable and In other studies, evolutionary optimization models are accessible to budget-conscious ecologists. Many research used to design the shape of anatomical structures. Ten, institutions have at least one 3D printing center and 3D 3D prints of the modeled and naturally occurring struc- printing services are available to all online. Other felds, tures are compared in performance tests to understand such as the health sciences, have readily adopted 3D the evolutionary limitations species face in structural printing into their research (e.g., [10]), but it is as of yet adaptation in examples such as station keeping in aquatic an untapped technology that ecologists can exploit to environments, morphological optimization of balance their advantage [11]. and efciency in fsh, and seahorse tail shape morphology Recent studies have highlighted the benefts of 3D [18–20]. For these studies, 3D models enabled scientifc printing in terms of cost and time efciency [12, 13], yet inquiry, as manipulating live animals would have been ecologists wanting to implement 3D printing for the frst challenging or impossible. time must still traverse a steep learning curve. Our goal In the feld of natural history curation, 3D printing here is to fatten the curve and provide ecologists with increases the speed at which discoveries are made, and a general but sufcient background in 3D printing tech- the rate at which data and resources are shared across nology to know what considerations are important when natural history collections [21]. In paleontology, the approaching a 3D printing project. In this article, we pro- reconstruction of complete skeletons is often impaired vide an overview of how 3D printing has been adopted by by the recovery of incomplete remains at dig sites. Mit- felds related to ecology. We highlight areas of ecological sopoulou et al. [22] used mathematical allometric scal- research where we think 3D printing has the promise to ing models to calculate the dimensions of bones missing be most efective and provide a methodological work- from the remains of a dwarf elephant (Paleoloxodon fow for integrating 3D printing into ecological studies. tiliensis) recovered from Charkadio Cave on Tilos Island, We illustrate this workfow using an example from our Greece. From these analyses, a 3D model was printed to own work, which includes the obstacles we encountered allow the complete skeleton to be assembled. In addition, and the solutions we devised. Finally, we conclude with 3D technology also facilitates the sharing of museum important environmental sustainability considerations. material without having to loan valuable specimens, making it possible to construct complete skeletons using Overview of 3D printing in felds related to ecology partial skeletons from multiple separate collections [23]. Two disciplines that were early adopters of 3D print- In fact, museums have been quick to adopt 3D technol- ing technology and have strong connections to ecology ogy because it vastly improves the rate at which collec- are biomechanics and natural history curation. Below tions are shared. Te exchange of 3D-printed specimens we provide examples of 3D printing implementations in facilitates crowd sourcing for specimen identifcation; these felds to provide ecologists with ideas of what is access to high-quality replicas of endangered, extinct, or possible. otherwise valuable and/or fragile specimens; and printed Te aim of biomechanics is to understand the move- specimens can even be used in a feld setting for spe- ment and structure of living organisms integrating across cies identifcation [23, 24]. Museums are increasingly physics, engineering, physiology, and ecology. In biome- accepting deposits of 3D printed material for rare and/ chanics, 3D printing is used to test how the shapes of or difcult to access specimens. Lak et al. [25] employed particular appendages or biological structures function 3D technology