Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Mar 15.
Published in final edited form as: Calcif Tissue Int. 2005 May 5;76(5):355–364. doi: 10.1007/s00223-004-0111-3

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Matched slices as closely as possible for specimen shown in Figures 1B, D and Fig. 2B for visual comparison between microcomputed tomography (μCT) and magnetic resonance (MR) images. (A) μCT, (B) MR image, (C) representative intensity histograms are demonstrated showing a bimodal distribution for μCT and a single broad peak for MR.