Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Orthop Res. 2013 Mar 13;31(8):1317–1322. doi: 10.1002/jor.22343

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Figure 2

Figure 2

Figure 2

Figure 2

Figure 2

Structural (A–C) and material (D–F) energy absorption properties as determined by three-point bending tests. Whole bone energy absorption to fracture (A) and energy absorption between ultimate load and fracture (C) both displayed significant drug × test rate interaction with ZOL-treated animals having lower values only at the slow test rate (noted by *). Post-yield energy absorption (B) displayed a similar pattern but the effect was not statistically significant (2-way ANOVA p values < 0.15). When normalized for bone geometry to calculate toughness, patterns similar to those of the structure were observed. Only toughness from ultimate stress to fracture was significant (*) while both toughness to fracture (D) and post-yield toughness (E) showed consistent trends (2-way ANOVA p values < 0.15).