Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Oct 19.
Published in final edited form as: J Biomech. 2010 Jul 31;43(14):2689–2694. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.06.019

Table 1.

Morphological parameters and bone density for mouse tibiae (mean ± SD)

6wk 10wk 16wk Statistical Test
Bone length (mm) 15.78 ± 0.13a 16.99 ± 0.15b 17.50 ± 0.12c A
AP diameter (mm) 1.13 ± 0.08 1.22 ± 0.10 1.21 ± 0.01 KW
ML diameter (mm) 1.06 ± 0.04a 1.15 ± 0.06b 1.13 ± 0.03a,b A
Ct.Ar (mm2) 0.50 ± 0.03a 0.62 ± 0.04b 0.65 ± 0.02b A
IMAX (mm4) 0.062 ± 0.010a 0.086 ± 0.017a,b 0.084 ± 0.004b KW
IMIN (mm4) 0.046 ± 0.007a 0.064 ± 0.011b 0.067 ± 0.005b A
CAP (mm) 0.63 ± 0.09a 0.77 ± 0.09a,b 0.84 ± 0.05b KW
CML(mm) 0.11 ± 0.10 0.22 ± 0.08 0.25 ± 0.05 A
TMD (g HA/cm3) 0.81 ± 0.04a 0.91 ± 0.01b 0.93 ± 0.03b A

AP: anterior-posterior, ML: medial-lateral, Ct.Ar: cortical area, IMAX, IMIN maximum and minimum principal moments of inertia, CAP, CML AP and ML radius of curvature, TMD: tissue mineral density, HA: hydroxyapatite. Different superscript letters indicate significant differences between age groups at p < 0.05. ANOVA (A) with Tukey-Kramer post hoc test and non-parametric Kruskall Wallis (KW) and post hoc Mann-Whitney U tests were used to distinguish age-related differences in the measured parameters.