Benefits And Limitations Of Three-Dimensional Printing Technology For Ecological Research

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 scientific fields 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 ecologists 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 workflow for integrating 3D printing into an ecological research program and give a detailed example of a successful implementation of our 3D printing workflow for 3D printed models of the brown anole, Anolis sagrei, for a field predation study. After testing two print media in the field, we show that the models printed from the less expensive and more sustainable material (blend of 70% plastic and 30% recycled wood fiber) 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 environmental impacts associated with 3D printing. The main hurdles for implementing 3D printing – availability of resources like printers, scanners, and software, as well as reaching proficiency in using 3D image software – may be easier to overcome at institutions with digital imaging centers run by knowledgeable staff. As with any new technology, the benefits of 3D printing are specific to a particular project, and ecologists must consider the investments of developing usable 3D materials for research versus other methods of generating those materials.

[1]  T. Madsen Are juvenile grass snakes, Natrix natrix, aposematically coloured? , 1987 .

[2]  P. Jansen,et al.  Using seed-tagging methods for assessing post-dispersal seed fate in rodent-dispersed trees , 2006 .

[3]  E. Brodie DIFFERENTIAL AVOIDANCE OF CORAL SNAKE BANDED PATTERNS BY FREE‐RANGING AVIAN PREDATORS IN COSTA RICA , 1993, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[4]  Patrick Steinle,et al.  Characterization of emissions from a desktop 3D printer and indoor air measurements in office settings , 2016, Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene.

[5]  E. Curio,et al.  Tracking Bat‐Dispersed Seeds Using Fluorescent Pigment 1 , 2005 .

[6]  Dina Rochman,et al.  Prototyping the complex biological form of the beetle Deltochilum Lobipes via 2D geometric morphometrics landmarks and descriptive geometry for 3D printing , 2016 .

[7]  Tim Gernat,et al.  Virtual skeletons: using a structured light scanner to create a 3D faunal comparative collection , 2009 .

[8]  W. Baumgartner,et al.  Adaptation to life in aeolian sand: how the sandfish lizard, Scincus scincus, prevents sand particles from entering its lungs , 2016, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[9]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  The future of citizen science: emerging technologies and shifting paradigms , 2012, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.

[10]  Jonathan N. Pauli,et al.  A Single-Sampling Hair Trap for Mesocarnivores , 2008, The Journal of Wildlife Management.

[11]  P. Tafforeau,et al.  Phase contrast X-ray synchrotron microtomography and the oldest damselflies in amber (Odonata: Zygoptera: Hemiphlebiidae) , 2009 .

[12]  Sachit Butail,et al.  Zebrafish response to 3D printed shoals of conspecifics: the effect of body size , 2016, Bioinspiration & biomimetics.

[13]  Joshua M. Pearce,et al.  Evaluation of Potential Fair Trade Standards for an Ethical 3-D Printing Filament , 2014 .

[14]  David Barrett,et al.  Autonomous vehicles for remote sample collection: Enabling marine research , 2015, OCEANS 2015 - Genova.

[15]  Philippe C. Baveye,et al.  Combining X-ray CT and 3D printing technology to produce microcosms with replicable, complex pore geometries , 2012 .

[16]  R. Amann,et al.  The application of “-omics” technologies for the classification and identification of animals , 2015, Organisms Diversity & Evolution.

[17]  Joshua M. Pearce,et al.  Distributed recycling of waste polymer into RepRap feedstock , 2013 .

[18]  Guha Manogharan,et al.  Making sense of 3-D printing: Creating a map of additive manufacturing products and services , 2014 .

[19]  L. Roucoules,et al.  3D printing device for numerical control machine and wood deposition , 2014 .

[20]  Branko Hilje,et al.  How habitat type, sex, and body region influence predatory attacks on Norops lizards in a pre-montane wet forest in Costa Rica: an approach using clay models , 2015 .

[21]  A. Herrel,et al.  The evolution of locomotor morphology, performance, and anti-predator behaviour among populations of Leiocephalus lizards from the Dominican Republic , 2008 .

[22]  Stamatios Polydoras,et al.  Digitizing, modelling and 3D printing of skeletal digital models of Palaeoloxodon tiliensis (Tilos, Dodecanese, Greece) , 2015 .

[23]  M. Porfiri,et al.  A Robotics-Based Behavioral Paradigm to Measure Anxiety-Related Responses in Zebrafish , 2013, PloS one.

[24]  Javeed Shaikh Mohammed,et al.  Applications of 3D printing technologies in oceanography , 2016 .

[25]  Anton J.M. Schoot Uiterkamp,et al.  A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies , 2014 .

[26]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  An experiment to test key hypotheses of the drivers of reptile distribution in subalpine ski resorts , 2014 .

[27]  J. Thomson,et al.  Flowers with caffeinated nectar receive more pollination , 2015, Arthropod-Plant Interactions.

[28]  J. Mahoney,et al.  Using Fossil Teeth to Study the Evolution of Horses in Response to a Changing Climate , 2016, The American Biology Teacher.

[29]  N. Ferro,et al.  From Real Soils to 3D‐Printed Soils: Reproduction of Complex Pore Network at the Real Size in a Silty‐Loam Soil , 2015 .

[30]  Giovanni Polverino,et al.  How different is a 3D-printed replica from a conspecific in the eyes of a zebrafish? , 2017, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[31]  Wei Shi,et al.  Assessing and Reducing the Toxicity of 3D-Printed Parts , 2016 .

[32]  Ryan F. LeBouf,et al.  Emission of particulate matter from a desktop three-dimensional (3D) printer , 2016, Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part A.

[33]  Peter B. Adler,et al.  Finding generality in ecology: a model for globally distributed experiments , 2014 .

[34]  Jason B Shear,et al.  Real-time monitoring of quorum sensing in 3D-printed bacterial aggregates using scanning electrochemical microscopy , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[35]  Reza Langari,et al.  Autonomous Vehicles , 2016, Science.

[36]  T. Daniel,et al.  Shape matters: corolla curvature improves nectar discovery in the hawkmoth Manduca sexta. , 2015, Functional ecology.

[37]  S. Bell,et al.  Three-dimensional interstitial space mediates predator foraging success in different spatial arrangements. , 2017, Ecology.

[38]  P. Azimi,et al.  Emissions of Ultrafine Particles and Volatile Organic Compounds from Commercially Available Desktop Three-Dimensional Printers with Multiple Filaments. , 2016, Environmental science & technology.

[39]  J. Shear,et al.  3D printing of microscopic bacterial communities , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[40]  Analía V. López,et al.  Using 3D printed eggs to examine the egg-rejection behaviour of wild birds , 2015, PeerJ.

[41]  Vladimir Mironov,et al.  Organ printing: promises and challenges. , 2008, Regenerative medicine.

[42]  Michaelangelo D. Tabone,et al.  Sustainability metrics: life cycle assessment and green design in polymers. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[43]  Georgy Gimel'farb,et al.  Dem quality assessment with a 3d printed gravel bed applied to stereo photogrammetry , 2014 .

[44]  Xiaobo Tan,et al.  Balancing performance and efficiency in a robotic fish with evolutionary multiobjective optimization , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Evolvable Systems.

[45]  Hannah M. Rowland,et al.  Body size but not warning signal luminance influences predation risk in recently metamorphosed poison frogs , 2015, Ecology and evolution.

[46]  R. Raguso,et al.  Disentangling visual and olfactory signals in mushroom-mimicking Dracula orchids using realistic three-dimensional printed flowers. , 2016, The New phytologist.

[47]  Daniel P. Germann,et al.  Artificial Bivalves - The Biomimetics of Underwater Burrowing , 2011, FET.

[48]  Charles M Watson,et al.  Three dimensional printing as an effective method of producing anatomically accurate models for studies in thermal ecology. , 2015, Journal of thermal biology.

[49]  David Lentink,et al.  Feather roughness reduces flow separation during low Reynolds number glides of swifts , 2015, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[50]  Alexander Ziegler,et al.  Accelerated Acquisition, Visualization, and Analysis of Zoo-Anatomical Data , 2014, Computation for Humanity.

[51]  Philip K. McKinley,et al.  Evolution of station keeping as a response to flows in an aquatic robot , 2013, GECCO '13.

[52]  Detecting emerald ash borers (Agrilus planipennis) using branch traps baited with 3D-printed beetle decoys , 2015, Journal of Pest Science.

[53]  Manu E. Saunders,et al.  Cost-benefit trade-offs of bird activity in apple orchards , 2016, PeerJ.