Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Dent Res. 2008 Jul;87(7):645–649. doi: 10.1177/154405910808700711

Table.

Micromechanical Characteristics of Murine Enamel from 4 Compositional Groups* Used in the Study (Values represent ± SD) and Their Statistical Comparison (t test, α = 0.05)

p values
Wet Untreated Dry Untreated Dry Treated Wet Treated Wet Untreated vs.
Wet Treated
Dry Untreated vs.
Dry Treated
Wet Untreated vs.
Dry Untreated
Wet Treated vs.
Dry Treated
Hardness (HV0.981) Mid-saggital plane 301 ± 8 345 ± 4 364 ± 8 369 ± 12 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.09
Transverse plane 319 ± 5 325 ± 11 336 ± 5 341 ± 11 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.02 0.06
Fracture toughness
(MPa*m1/2)
Mid-saggital plane 1.57 ± 0.1 1.22 ± 0.1 1.01 ± 0.1 0.91 ± 0.13 < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.04
Transverse plane 0.57 ± 0.1 0.52 ± 0.1 0.33 ± 0.06 0.31 ± 0.06 < 0.001 < 0.001 0.13 0.23
Crack length (μm) Mid-saggital plane 13.8 ± 0.9 15.7 ± 0.9 17.4 ± 1.1 18.7 ± 1.9
Transverse plane 27.1 ± 3.5 28.8 ± 4.4 38.4 ± 5.5 40.2 ± 5.1
*

Three samples per group were tested; from 10 to 14 micro-indentations in the mid-sagittal plane and from 5 to 9 in the transverse plane were performed on each sample.