Fig 1.
(A) 3D reconstruction of a left femur from Equus sp. (UF 234402) downloaded from morphosource.org and visualized using Meshlab [20]. Specimen demonstrates several preservational issues commonly encountered while working with 3D imaging data (labeled). (B) View of the mesh components that comprise the 3D reconstruction, which includes (C) edges, vertices and faces.
Fig 2.
3D reconstruction of Petriellaea triangulata [12], before (A) and after (B) post-processing. A. 3D mesh [12] exported directly from Avizo version 9.2.0 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Massachusetts, USA). Object file exhibits many of the common issues described for fossil taxa, such as holes and irregular surfaces, which represent artefacts from preservation, low density contrast in the micro-CT image, and manual segmentation. B. 3D mesh file post-processed in Meshlab. Images generated using Autodesk Maya.
Fig 3.
3D reconstruction of Sphenodon punctatus (UF 11978, Florida Museum of Natural History) before (A) and after (B) post-processing. 3D mesh was downloaded directly from Morphosource.org. (A) Mesh was artificially damaged to create a hole in the roof of the skull and a missing lower temporal bar. B. 3D mesh file post-processed in Autodesk Maya and Autodesk Fusion 360 with patched hole and reconstructed temporal bar. Images generated using Meshlab.
Fig 4.
3D reconstruction of Cretapsara athanata [5] before (A) and after (B) post-processing. (A) 3D mesh [5] exported directly from VG Studio MAX version 3.0. Object file exhibits many of the common issues described for fossil taxa, including the presence of external debris, disarticulated elements, isolated or missing mesh elements, holes, and irregular surfaces. (B) 3D mesh file post-processed in Meshlab and Autodesk Maya. Images generated using Autodesk Maya.
Fig 5.
Summary workflow to address common issues with 3D imaging data.
Step-by-step guidelines with examples and associated 3D object files can be found in the supplementary information (S1 File).