Table 3.
Hypertonic Shifts | Hypotonic Shifts | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lens No. | Control (290 mOsM) | Sucrose 50 mM (340 mOsM) | Restore Control Solution (290 mOsM) | Sucrose 100 mM (390 mOsM) | Restore Control Solution (290 mOsM) | Lens No. | Control (290 mOsM) | Tonicity Reduced (250 mOsM) | Restore Control Solution (290 mOsM) | Tonicity Reduced (200 mOsM) | Restore Control Solution (290 mOsM) |
Exp 13 | 0.747 | 0.759 | 0.757 | 0.758 | 0.761 | Exp 17 | 0.770 | 0.776 | 0.775 | 0.781 | 0.788 |
Exp 14 | 0.774 | 0.777 | 0.778 | 0.778 | 0.778 | Exp 20 | 0.738 | 0.743 | 0.745 | 0.760 | 0.765 |
Exp 15 | 0.745 | 0.751 | 0.750 | 0.751 | 0.754 | Exp 21 | 0.731 | 0.741 | 0.744 | 0.760 | 0.766 |
Exp 16 | 0.757 | 0.764 | 0.766 | 0.770 | 0.766 | Exp 22 | 0.721 | 0.727 | 0.742 | 0.751 | 0.766 |
Exp 25 | 0.788 | 0.790 | 0.792 | 0.792 | 0.797 | Exp 23 | 0.774 | 0.784 | 0.777 | 0.789 | 0.783 |
Exp 26 | 0.812 | 0.809 | 0.816 | 0.811 | 0.821 | Exp 24 | 0.807 | 0.812 | 0.814 | 0.830 | 0.842 |
Exp 27 | 0.759 | 0.759 | 0.761 | 0.757 | 0.763 | Exp 29 | 0.736 | 0.745 | 0.747 | 0.755 | 0.758 |
Exp 28 | 0.766 | 0.768 | 0.772 | 0.771 | 0.772 | Exp 30 | 0.742 | 0.747 | 0.749 | 0.758 | 0.762 |
Mean: | 0.769 | 0.772* | 0.774* | 0.774* | 0.777* | Average: | 0.752 | 0.759** | 0.762** | 0.773** | 0.779** |
(n): | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | (n): | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
SEM: | 0.008 | 0.007 | 0.008 | 0.007 | 0.008 | SEM: | 0.010 | 0.010 | 0.009 | 0.009 | 0.010 |
The ratio of the AP-length to the ED of the lenses presented in Tables 1 and 2 are compiled as a measure of the changes in lens “circularity” under the imposed anisotonic conditions.
Value significantly greater than the initial control value at beginning of experiment, 0.769 (P< 0.03, as paired data).
Value significantly greater than its respective antecedent (P< 0.001, as paired data).