Microstructure–Property Relationships in Human Adult and Baby Canine Teeth

It Meng Low; N. Duraman; Ian J. Davies

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.309-311.23

Paper Titles

Crystallites Size and Changes in Mineral Phase of Bone with Age and Type of Bone
p.7

Morphological Characterization of Femur and Parietal Bone Mineral of Rats at Different Ages
p.11

A Comparative Study of Thai and Australian Crocodile Bone for Use as a Potential Biomaterial
p.15

Variation in Composition of Bone Surrounding Implants
p.19

Microstructure–Property Relationships in Human Adult and Baby Canine Teeth
p.23

A Histological Study of Human Derived Tooth-Hydroxyapatite (THA)
p.27

Observation of Newly Formed Bone Around Dental Implants Using Parametric X-ray
p.31

Evaluation of Bovine Bone Ash Particles for Tooth-Bearing Bone Defect Healing
p.37

Effect of Heat-Treatment Temperature on the Osteoconductivity of the Apatite Derived from Bovine Bone
p.41

HomeKey Engineering MaterialsKey Engineering Materials Vols. 309-311Microstructure–Property Relationships in Human...

Microstructure–Property Relationships in Human Adult and Baby Canine Teeth

Abstract:

Structure-property relationships in baby and adult teeth have been characterised using grazing-incidence synchrotron radiation diffraction and Vickers indentation. Similarities and differences between both types of teeth have been highlighted and discussed. Depth profiling results indicated the existence of contrasting but distinct gradual changes in crystal disorder, phase abundance, crystallite size and hardness within the baby and adult canine enamel, thus confirming the graded nature of human teeth. When compared to the adult tooth, the baby enamel is softer, more prone to fracture, but has larger hydroxyapatite grains.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Key Engineering Materials (Volumes 309-311)

Pages:

23-26

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.309-311.23

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

May 2006

Authors:

It Meng Low, N. Duraman, Ian J. Davies

Keywords:

Enamel, Graded Structure, Synchrotron Radiation Diffraction, Vickers Indentation

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

References

[1] A.R. Ten Cate: Oral Histology: Development, Structure, and Function, 4th ed. (Mosby, St. Louis, MO, 1994).

Google Scholar

[2] P.W. Lucas, pp.154-162 in: Basic Principles of Tooth Design, Teeth, Form, Function, Evolution, Ed. B. Kurten (Columbia Univ. Press, New York, 1979).

Google Scholar

[3] I.M. Low: J. Am. Ceram. Soc. Vol. 87 (2004), p.2125.

Google Scholar

[4] K. Sudarsanan and R. A. Young: Acta Crystallogr. B Vol. 25 (1969), p.1534.

Google Scholar

[5] I.M. Low, N. Duraman, J. Fulton, N. Tezuka and I.J. Davies: Ceramic Engineering & Science Proceedings Vol. 26 (2005), In press.

Google Scholar

[6] I.M. Low: J. Europ. Ceram. Soc. Vol. 18 (1998), p.225.

Google Scholar

[7] I.M. Low, S.K. Lee, M.W. Barsoum, and B.R. Lawn: J. Am. Ceram. Soc. Vol. 81 (1998), p.225.

Google Scholar

[8] N. Meredith, M. Sherriff, D.J. Setchell and S.A.V. Swanson: Arch. Oral Biology Vol. 41 (1996), p.539.

Google Scholar

[9] J.L. Cuy, A.B. Mann, K.J. Livi, M.F. Teaford, and T.P. Weihs: Arch. Oral Biology Vol. 47 (2002), p.281 Fig. 7: Comparison of fracture toughness in the baby and adult tooth.

DOI: 10.1016/s0003-9969(02)00006-7

Google Scholar