. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Apr 3.

Published in final edited form as: Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2008 Nov 2;8(5):345–358. doi: 10.1007/s10237-008-0139-9

Table 4.

Young’s modulus (mean ± st. dev.) of cartilage matrix and cells from the models

Model^a	Eng. cartilage^b,^c		Mouse matrix^b		Mouse Cells ^b
	E₀ (kPa)	Mean r²	E₀ (kPa)	Mean r²	E₀ (kPa)	Mean r²
Hz	0.81–5.08	0.9359	97.79 ± 16.78	0.8755	45.64 ± 12.46	0.9025
sHz	0.45–3.59	0.9635	56.69 ± 15.54	0.9291	19.39 ± 4.74	0.9725
NH	0.68–4.39	0.9528	99.92 ± 19.08	0.8982	41.81 ± 12.27	0.9098
MR	0.60–4.04	0.9584	95.21 ± 18.50	0.9215	39.18 ± 11.76	0.9153
2p^d	Failed	–	Failed	–	Failed	–
Fu	0.46–3.03	0.9962	19.64 ± 2.30	0.9996	11.05 ± 2.01	0.9997
Og	0.54–3.97	0.9976	19.71 ± 3.40	0.9995	12.47 ± 2.44	0.9996
vdW	0.62–4.12	0.9573	96.33 ± 18.64	0.8871	39.79 ± 11.88	0.9141
GD	0.66–4.31	0.9540	98.79 ± 18.93	0.8847	41.18 ± 12.14	0.9110
TG	0.65–4.25	0.9548	98.02 ± 18.84	0.8854	40.76 ± 12.06	0.9118

Abbreviations from Table 3

Ten randomly selected samples

Range of values shown rather than mean ± standard deviation since measurements for matrix and cells could not be separated

Two-term polynomial model failed to produce viable fits in the majority of cases