Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 May 25.
Published in final edited form as: Soft Matter. 2011 Dec 23;8(6):1964–1976. doi: 10.1039/c1sm06629c

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Rheological assessment of chitosan and agarose scaffolds. (A) Frequency sweep of chitosan (0.5%) and agarose (1%) hydrogels. (B) Storage modulus comparison of chitosan versus agarose hydrogels, * shows significantly higher (p < 0.05) storage modulus as compared to chitosan scaffolds. (C) Storage moduli of various chitosan percentages, * indicates significant higher storage modulus of 1% chitosan as compared to 0.5 and 0.25% hydrogels, ** indicates significantly higher storage modulus of 0.5% hydrogels as compared to 0.25% hydrogels (p < 0.05).