spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online July 20, 2006
Journal of Experimental Biology 209, 3025-3042 (2006)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2006
doi: 10.1242/jeb.02304
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Skedros, J. G.
Right arrow Articles by Bachus, K. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Skedros, J. G.
Right arrow Articles by Bachus, K. N.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The influence of collagen fiber orientation and other histocompositional characteristics on the mechanical properties of equine cortical bone

John G. Skedros1,2,*, Michael R. Dayton3, Christian L. Sybrowsky1,2, Roy D. Bloebaum2 and Kent N. Bachus4

1 Utah Bone and Joint Center, 5323 S. Woodrow Street #202, Salt Lake City, UT 84107, USA
2 Bone and Joint Research Laboratories, Deparment of Veteran's Affairs Medical Center, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
3 Department of Orthopaedics, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Aurora, CO, USA
4 Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA


Figure 1
View larger version (42K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1. Finite element model of the MC3 of a Thoroughbred. Left: Arrow indicates the mid-diaphyseal location of the third metacarpal. Right: Finite element meshes from Gross et al. (Gross et al., 1992Go) showing distribution of normal strain (A), shear strain (B) and strain energy density (C) acting on the mid-diaphyseal cross-section at the time of peak strain during the gait cycle [sites of maximum strain are noted by the large arrows, sites of least strain by the small arrows (B,C) or neutral axis (A)]. L, lateral. [Reprinted from Journal of Biomechanics, vol. 25, `Characterizing bone strain distributions in vivo using three triple rosette strain gages,' pp. 1081-1087, with permission from Elsevier Science LTD, the Boulevard, Lanford Lane, Kidlington OX5 1GB, UK. This adaptation of the original figure (Gross et al., 1992Go) has already been used (Skedros et al., 2003aGo).]

 

Figure 2
View larger version (18K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2. Compression and tension specimen locations in the equine MC3. (A) Locations of the six compression cube specimens: dorsal-lateral (D-L, N=2), Lateral (L, N=1), palmar-medial (P-M, N=2), and dorsal-medial (D-M, N=1). Black regions denote habitual tension. White regions denote habitual compression. The lateral cortex may receive predominant tension at higher gait speeds due to shifting of the neutral axis (NA to NA', hatched region). (B) Locations of the four tension dumbbell specimens: dorsal-lateral (D-L, N=2) and palmar-medial (P-M, N=2). [This adaptation of the original NA (Gross et al., 1992Go) has already been used (Skedros et al., 2003aGo) in a study examining `regional' safety factors.]

 

Figure 3
View larger version (27K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3. Specimen geometry and locations of histocompositional analyses. (A) Tension (dumbbell-shaped) and (B) compression (cubic) specimens. In (C) the hatched areas indicate the locations where fragments were obtained for microstructural, CFO and % ash analyses. BSE denotes that backscattered electron imaging was used for analysis of microstructure. % Ash was determined on ~50-70% of the portion labeled `% ash' and indicated by the non-bolded hatched lines.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (13K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4. Stress-strain curves. (A) Representative curves from strain-mode-specific (S-M-S) tests. The arrows indicate the yield points, which were defined using the 0.002 strain offset criterion (see B). Note that in B the tension curve has been offset toward the right so that it can be viewed clearly. (B) Illustration showing the 0.002 strain offset criterion, which is modified from Turner (Turner, 1989Go). This criterion is used because it helps to avoid the nonlinear `toe' region of the stress-strain curve, which ends at about 15% of the yield stress in linearly elastic materials. E indicates the portion of the curve where elastic modulus was determined.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (22K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 5. Two representative scatter plots for strain-mode-specific (S-M-S) tension (A) and compression (B) testing. The equations represent the least-squares regression lines.

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2006