Evaluating the effects of morphology and orientation on feeding in atrypide brachiopods using 3-D printed models

Dievert, Rylan V.; Barclay, Kristina M.; Molinaro, Darrin J.; Leighton, Lindsey R.

doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.04.020

Cited by 3 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, the ability to alter existing taxa or create new, hypothetical forms allows the study of non-existent morphologies, optimization, and evolutionary constraint (see Porter et al, 2015). Paleontologists have 3D printed numerous vertebrate morphologies including dinosaurs, fishes, marine reptiles, and mammals (Balanoff and Rowe, 2002;Bristowe et al, 2004;Schilling et al, 2013;Mitsopoulou et al, 2015;Das et al, 2017;Muscutt et al, 2017;White et al, 2017;Clark, 2018;Grant et al, 2018;Voegele et al, 2018) as well as invertebrates like mollusks, trilobites, brachiopods, and echinoderms (Huynh et al, 2013;Pearson, 2017;Anderson et al, 2018;DiMarco et al, 2018;Garcia et al, 2018;Johnson et al, 2018;Morse et al, 2018;Peterman and Ciampaglio, 2018;Dievert et al, 2019). Designing meaningful physical models for experimentation requires thoughtful printing choices to isolate variables.…”

Section: D Replicas In Paleontologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The methods used to create prints using these different materials are variable (e.g., Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM), Polyjet Technology, and Binder Jetting, Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), and Selective Laser Melting) (Bluedge 5 and Shapeways 4 , see Walker and Humphries, 2019) as are their resolutions and capabilities. Many different materials have been used in previous paleontological and biological studies, primarily plastics (Huynh et al, 2013;Germann et al, 2014;Mehrabani et al, 2014;Porter et al, 2015;Muscutt et al, 2017;Pearson, 2017;Anderson et al, 2018;Garcia et al, 2018;Voegele et al, 2018;Dievert et al, 2019), powders (Schilling et al, 2013;Crofts and Summers, 2014;Ishida and Kishimoto, 2015;Kolmann et al, 2015;Johnson et al, 2018), and resins (Jonsson et al, 2017;DiMarco et al, 2018). The cost of printers and materials varies widely.…”

Section: Materials Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Plastics have been a popular choice to study functional morphology in hydrodynamic studies (Huynh et al, 2013;Muscutt et al, 2017;Pearson, 2017;Anderson et al, 2018;Garcia et al, 2018;Peterman and Ciampaglio, 2018;Dievert et al, 2019). This is likely because of their comparatively low cost and easy accessibility compared to other waterproof materials.…”

Section: Materials Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Anderson et al (2018) used plastic prints of turritelline gastropods to study the influence of shell ornamentation on fluid flow on partially buried snails. Dievert et al (2019) tested the influence of shape and orientation on brachiopod feeding; using a translucent plastic to visualize fluid flow within the valves (Figure 2F). Dievert et al (2019) also printed dissolvable supports for the delicate brachidia inside their shells.…”

Section: Materials Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dievert et al (2019) tested the influence of shape and orientation on brachiopod feeding; using a translucent plastic to visualize fluid flow within the valves (Figure 2F). Dievert et al (2019) also printed dissolvable supports for the delicate brachidia inside their shells. Plastics were the most viable option for these tests, which required a rigid shell but not a brittle material.…”

Section: Materials Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Defossilization: A Review of 3D Printing in Experimental Paleontology

Johnson

Carter

2019

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

3D printing has made it possible to recreate, actuate, and modify replicas of ancient life in transformative ways-revolutionizing studies of ancient life. While 3D printing has previously been emphasized as an educational tool in paleontology, it has also created a wide array of experimental opportunities previously unavailable to investigators. Although 3D printing has been used extensively for experimental studies in many STEM fields, the biases of the fossil record and constraints of the fossilization process create unique challenges for paleontological studies. Here, we outline a guide for using this technology for experimental paleontology: from designing a virtual model to choosing the most effective printing material-highlighting successful employment of these methods by previous investigators. As it can be challenging to adopt new methods in a meaningful way, we hope that this paper will serve as a useful tool for current and future paleontologists who seek to apply these techniques.

show abstract

Section: D Replicas In Paleontologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Materials Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Materials Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Materials Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Materials Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Defossilization: A Review of 3D Printing in Experimental Paleontology

Johnson

Carter

2019

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The functional performance of productidine brachiopods in relation to environmental variables

Dievert

Gingras

Leighton

2021

LET

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fossils are useful as palaeoenvironmental indicators when evaluated using large occurrence and lithology association data sets and/or functional morphology. However, when functional morphology is invoked on an ad hoc basis there exists a risk of circular reasoning. Performance spaces/landscapes constructed using biomechanical experiments can be used to tie performance to morphology quantitatively. They can be used to estimate fitness and function in specific environments by allowing multiple specific measures of function to be evaluated simultaneously. Absolute performance can be used to constrain palaeoenvironmental interpretations by detecting functional limits. We constructed a performance space with four variables (transport resistance, settling time, settling orientation and respiration potential) relating to hydrodynamic and metabolic variables. We combine new performance data with existing palaeoenvironmental interpretations and associated distributions of brachiopods of the suborder Productidina during the late Carboniferous and early Permian in the North American Midcontinent. Productidines were chosen because they lacked pedicles and relied on body and spine morphology to interact with their environment. Offshore dysoxiaassociated taxa had increased resistance to sinking and proportionally larger lophophores, potentially improving survivorship in low-oxygen, soft substrate environments. Taxa associated with nearshore and oxygenated offshore environments display a range in performance consistent with a range of conditions, but all had proportionally smaller lophophores. Models that are less stable in high-velocity flows consistently settle in the correct convex down orientation if entrained, while more stable models did not. Our study suggests that as productidines radiated during the Carboniferous, they also differentiated within the performance space. □ 3D printing, functional morphology, palaeoenvironment, Pennsylvanian, Permian.

show abstract

Quantifying the Functional Morphology of Productidine Brachiopods through Performance

Dievert¹

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluating the effects of morphology and orientation on feeding in atrypide brachiopods using 3-D printed models

Cited by 3 publications

References 20 publications

Defossilization: A Review of 3D Printing in Experimental Paleontology

Defossilization: A Review of 3D Printing in Experimental Paleontology

The functional performance of productidine brachiopods in relation to environmental variables

Quantifying the Functional Morphology of Productidine Brachiopods through Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About