Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2015.01.014

Título: Comparison of chemical composition of enamel and dentine in human, bovine, porcine and ovine teeth
Fecha de publicación: may-2015
Editorial: Elsevier
Cita bibliográfica: Archives of Oral Biology, 2015, Vol. 60, Issue 5, pp. 768-775
ISSN: Print: 0003-9969
Palabras clave: C/N analysis
TG–MS
WDXRF
Enamel
Dentine
Resumen: Objective The aim of this paper was to compare the chemical composition of human teeth with other mammal species that are likely candidates for replacing them in studies that test dental material. Design Dentine and enamel fragments extracted from 400 sound human, bovine, porcine and ovine – 100 teeth per species – incisors and molars were mechanically ground up to a final particle size of less than 100 μm. C/N analysis, thermogravimetric analysis coupled to mass spectrometry (TG–MS), and wavelength dispersive X-ray fluorescence (WDXRF) were used to analyse the samples’ composition. Results Elemental analysis showed more organic carbon and nitrogen in dentine than in enamel. Human enamel was the most highly mineralised, with C and N values close to hydroxyapatite. Bovine dentine and enamel were the most similar to human. TG–MS: in all species, enamel contained less carbon and organic matter than dentine. Thermal decomposition of human enamel showed great similarity to synthetic hydroxyapatite, and large differences from bovine, ovine and porcine enamel. Thermal decomposition showed the greatest similarity between human and bovine dentine. WDXRF: Dentine contained larger quantities of Mg, S, Sr and Zn than enamel. Enamel contained larger quantities of P, Ca, Cl, Cu, K and Ca/P ratio than dentine. Human enamel and dentine contained a higher Ca/P ratio, larger quantities of Cl and Cu and lower quantities of Mg, S, Zn than the animal species. Conclusions Elemental analysis, TG–MS and WDXRF have shown that human and bovine enamel and dentine show the greatest similarity among the species analysed.
Autor/es principal/es: Teruel, Juan de Dios
Alcolea, Alberto
Hernández, Ana
Ortiz Ruiz, Antonio José
Facultad/Departamentos/Servicios: Facultades, Departamentos, Servicios y Escuelas::Departamentos de la UMU::Dermatología, Estomatología, Radiología y Medicina Física
Versión del editor: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003996915000308
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10201/142652
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2015.01.014
Tipo de documento: info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Número páginas / Extensión: 8
Derechos: info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
Descripción: © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. This document is the Published version of a Published Work that appeared in final form in Archives of Oral Biology. To access the final edited and published work see https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2015.01.014
Aparece en las colecciones:Artículos: Dermatología, Estomatología, Radiología y Medicina Física

Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción TamañoFormato 
comparison of chemical composition.pdf890,58 kBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir    Solicitar una copia


Los ítems de Digitum están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.