Skip to main content
. 2022 Apr 22;13:404–410. doi: 10.3762/bjnano.13.33

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Elastic modulus and water content of specimens in different treatment groups. (a) The elastic moduli of fresh (n = 5), frozen (n = 5), desiccated (n = 5), and rehydrated (n = 5) hind tibiae are 4.8 ± 0.2, 7.3 ± 0.2, 9.4 ± 0.5, and 6.2 ± 0.2 GPa, respectively. Significant differences were determined via Holm–Sidak one-way ANOVA. Different capital letters indicate significant differences (P < 0.001). (b) Elastic modulus of fresh tibiae as a function of the recorded time. Different samples are presented in different colors. Each data point represents the elastic modulus obtained from a distinct indentation site. (c) Water contents of fresh (n = 15), frozen (n = 15), desiccated (n = 15), and rehydrated (n = 15) hind tibiae. Significant differences were determined via Kruskal–Wallis one-way ANOVA on ranks. Different capital letters indicate significant differences (P < 0.05). (d) Water contents of fresh (n = 3) and frozen tibiae (n = 3) as function of the time.