The future of clay model studies

Abstract Background Many intriguing questions about predator-prey interactions can be addressed by using clay models of prey animals. These are placed in the field to test predators’ avoidances or preferences (testing e.g. color or shape) or to gain insights into predator identity. Modeling clay all...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Daniela C. Rößler, Heike Pröhl, Stefan Lötters
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2018-07-01
Series:BMC Zoology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40850-018-0033-6
id doaj-2b3ee1ca74284ffbb700421b2dae606a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-2b3ee1ca74284ffbb700421b2dae606a2020-11-24T22:04:02ZengBMCBMC Zoology2056-31322018-07-01311510.1186/s40850-018-0033-6The future of clay model studiesDaniela C. Rößler0Heike Pröhl1Stefan Lötters2Department of Biogeography, Trier UniversityInstitute of Zoology, University of Veterinary Medicine HannoverDepartment of Biogeography, Trier UniversityAbstract Background Many intriguing questions about predator-prey interactions can be addressed by using clay models of prey animals. These are placed in the field to test predators’ avoidances or preferences (testing e.g. color or shape) or to gain insights into predator identity. Modeling clay allows teeth, beak and jaw marks to remain on the model for identification. First used 30 years ago, clay models are now widely deployed. Ever since, the complexity of hypotheses, modeled species as well as the number of clay models used per study has increased. Although clay models are a valuable research tool, the method has limitations. Some questions cannot be addressed with these experiments, yet there is potential for improvement. Main body We focus on the following aspects that need attention for clay model studies (CMS) in the future: (1) Use of proper clay materials, (2) how to standardize attack identification, (3) limitations of clay model studies, (4) use of clay models beyond predation experiments and (5) the next generation of clay model studies. Conclusion We conclude that certain aspects of the clay model paradigm urgently need greater standardization. We advocate the use of harmless clay products and non-toxic inks, as well as having a neutral person to evaluate the marks left in the clay against pre-defined inclusion criteria. Further we suggest to use experimental data more cautiously in respect to evolutionary explanations, to use clay studies in detection experiments and to develop methods for attacker identification based on predator salivary DNA.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40850-018-0033-6Ecological studiesPredator-prey interactionsPredator salivary DNA
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Daniela C. Rößler
Heike Pröhl
Stefan Lötters
spellingShingle Daniela C. Rößler
Heike Pröhl
Stefan Lötters
The future of clay model studies
BMC Zoology
Ecological studies
Predator-prey interactions
Predator salivary DNA
author_facet Daniela C. Rößler
Heike Pröhl
Stefan Lötters
author_sort Daniela C. Rößler
title The future of clay model studies
title_short The future of clay model studies
title_full The future of clay model studies
title_fullStr The future of clay model studies
title_full_unstemmed The future of clay model studies
title_sort future of clay model studies
publisher BMC
series BMC Zoology
issn 2056-3132
publishDate 2018-07-01
description Abstract Background Many intriguing questions about predator-prey interactions can be addressed by using clay models of prey animals. These are placed in the field to test predators’ avoidances or preferences (testing e.g. color or shape) or to gain insights into predator identity. Modeling clay allows teeth, beak and jaw marks to remain on the model for identification. First used 30 years ago, clay models are now widely deployed. Ever since, the complexity of hypotheses, modeled species as well as the number of clay models used per study has increased. Although clay models are a valuable research tool, the method has limitations. Some questions cannot be addressed with these experiments, yet there is potential for improvement. Main body We focus on the following aspects that need attention for clay model studies (CMS) in the future: (1) Use of proper clay materials, (2) how to standardize attack identification, (3) limitations of clay model studies, (4) use of clay models beyond predation experiments and (5) the next generation of clay model studies. Conclusion We conclude that certain aspects of the clay model paradigm urgently need greater standardization. We advocate the use of harmless clay products and non-toxic inks, as well as having a neutral person to evaluate the marks left in the clay against pre-defined inclusion criteria. Further we suggest to use experimental data more cautiously in respect to evolutionary explanations, to use clay studies in detection experiments and to develop methods for attacker identification based on predator salivary DNA.
topic Ecological studies
Predator-prey interactions
Predator salivary DNA
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40850-018-0033-6
work_keys_str_mv AT danielacroßler thefutureofclaymodelstudies
AT heikeprohl thefutureofclaymodelstudies
AT stefanlotters thefutureofclaymodelstudies
AT danielacroßler futureofclaymodelstudies
AT heikeprohl futureofclaymodelstudies
AT stefanlotters futureofclaymodelstudies
_version_ 1725830877251895296