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...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
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 |