Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Dec 19.
Published in final edited form as: J Biomed Mater Res A. 2011 Jun 16;98(4):499–508. doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.33125

Figure 3.

Figure 3

A) Charted data comparing the average migration distance grouped into 20, 40 and 60μm pores sizes regardless of material treatment or healing time. B) Distribution of migration distances for 20, 40 and 60μm pore sizes (midline indicates global average and arrows indicate positions of the migrating fronts for each pore size). C) Charted data comparing the average migration distance of poly(HEMA) and CDI modified poly(HEMA) regardless of pore size or healing time. D) Distribution of migration distances for poly(HEMA) and CDI (midline indicates global average and arrows indicate positions of the migrating fronts for each material). E) Charted data comparing the average migration distance of 3, 7 and 14 days of healing time regardless of pore size and material treatment. F) Distribution of migration distances for 3, 7 and 14 days of healing time (midline indicates overall average and arrows indicate positions of the averaged 2.5% furthest distances, or maximal front, for each healing time). Error bars represent standard error. P-values less than 0.05 are considered significant.