Skip to main content
. 2021 Mar 19;11:6414. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-85585-9

Table 1.

Bone volume (cm3), bone density (g.cm−3), bone mineral density (g.cm−3), percentage of water, organic and mineral materials from the animals' femur for the control (C) and trained (T) groups kept in small cage (SC) and large cage (LC).

Small cage Large cage Housing space effect Training effect Interaction
C T C T P F P F P F
Bone volume (cm3) 0.09 ± 0.01 0.10 ± 0.01 0.11 ± 0.01 0.10 ± 0.01 0.34 0.89 0.83 0.04 0.21 1.61
Bone density (g.cm−3) 1.24 ± 0.03 1.21 ± 0.08 1.24 ± 0.06 1.19 ± 0.08 0.64 0.21 0.05 3.88 0.71 0.13
Bone mineral density (g.cm−3) 0.25 ± 0.05 0.22 ± 0.04 0.24 ± 0.05 0.22 ± 0.06 0.74 0.11 0.18 1.84 0.62 0.24
Bone water (%) 61.15 ± 4.19 62.62 ± 2.81 63.69 ± 3.42 61.9 ± 2.56 0.39 0.73 0.88 0.02 0.13 2.31
Organic material (%) 18.23 ± 3.71 18.83 ± 3.63 16.91 ± 2.62 18.6 ± 3.50 0.49 0.47 0.27 1.20 0.59 0.29
Mineral material (%) 20.60 ± 4.07 18.54 ± 3.56 19.38 ± 3.57 19.0 ± 4.26 0.78 0.07 0.34 0.91 0.48 0.49

Data are in mean ± standard deviation (SD). Statistical analysis: We used two-way ANOVA for identifying the effects of housing space and training and housing space and post-hoc Newman Keuls to trace differences among groups.