Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Bone Miner Res. 2014 Dec;29(12):2676–2687. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.2296

Fig. 7.

Fig. 7

Comparison of trabecular bone structure in P0 WT and cKO mice assessed by μCT. (A, B) Representative μCT images of WT and cKO femurs. (C) BV/TV, (D) Tb.N, and (E) Tb.Th were decreased in femurs of cKO mice. (F) There was no statistical increase in Tb.Sp in cKO mice. (G, H) Representative μCT images of WT and cKO L5 vertebrae. Arrows indicate defects in shape. (I) BV/TV, (J) Tb.N, (K) Tb.Th, and (L) Tb.Sp of L5 vertebrae in WT and cKO L5 vertebrae. n = 9; *p < 0.05. cKO = conditional knockout; BV/TV = bone volume/total volume; Tb.N = trabecular number; Tb.Th = trabecular thickness; Tb.Sp = trabecular spacing.