Two methods of volume measurement were compared, to develop a simple and reliable method for estimating the whole-antler density. We used 10 cast antlers, previously dried and weighed, from 10 different red deer (Cervus elaphus hispanicus) individuals. The volumes were determined by the traditional Archimedes method versus a new parametric volume-modelling technique using a ‘computer-aided design-three dimensions’ (3D-CAD), which is now being used in the biomedical industry in applications such as medical-implant design, tissue engineering and in developing a better understanding of anatomical functionality and morphological analysis. The process paths to follow in the generation of CAD models from cast antlers were described. The whole-antler density was estimated from the weight and volume measurement and a paired-sample comparison procedure was performed to assess differences between volumes as well as densities. Cast-antler weight ranged from 219.93 to 1857.9 g, and the volume estimated by the hydrostatic method was 732.45 ± 474.06 cm3 and by the CAD-3D method it was 730.65 ± 492.59 cm3. The DM density of the antler by the hydrostatic method (Density A) was 1.112 ± 0.120 g/cm3, ranging from 0.915 to 1.345 g/cm3 (Shapiro–Wilks, P = 0.449), and by the 3D-CAD method (Density B) it was 1.112 ± 0.158 g/cm3, ranging from 0.939 to 1.326 g/cm3 (Shapiro–Wilks, P = 0.751). There were no differences in the volume (t = 0.95, P = 0.37) or density (t = 0.54, P = 0.60) between the two methods and the correlation coefficient between Density A and Density B was 0.968. Both methods had similar reliability, although the computing process with the 3D-CAD system calculated antler volume faster than did the traditional hydrostatic weighing. 3D-CAD also avoided cast damage and the methodological problems with larger or smaller antlers or with floatability due to low density, which occur when using the hydrostatic method.

No abstract