Objectives
Despite similar mandibular growth to that of humans, pigs lack a chin projection as shown in most humans. To understand whether this divergence is contributed to differences in local symphyseal growth, this project characterized bone modeling activities at the symphyseal surfaces of juvenile pigs.
Material and Methods
Symphyseal specimens from 2 age groups (4- and 6-month-old, n=10) were processed into histological sections with and without decalcification, which were assessed for surface mineral apposition and bone resorption, respectively. In a blinded fashion, measurements of four parameters (MAR: mineral apposition rate, MAZ: mineral apposition zone; ES/BS: eroded surface; OC.N/BS: osteoclast number) were obtained and tested by a multivariate two-way mixed-model analyses of variance (MANOVA) for the differences between symphyseal regions and ages.
Results
Qualitatively, pig symphyseal labial and lingual surfaces were horizontally oriented and characterized by mineral apposition and bone resorption, respectively. Quantitatively, labial mineral apposition tended to be greater rostrally than caudally at 4 months, which became greater caudally than rostrally at 6 months (region/age interactions: p=0.127 for MAR, p=0.012 for MAZ). Lingual bone resorption tended to be greater caudally than rostrally, but only ES/BS measurements was significant (p=0.039) regardless of age while OC.N/BS measurements varied with ages and regions (age/region interaction, p=0.087).
Conclusions
Insufficient differential in symphyseal surface modeling between the labial-caudal and labial-rostral regions contributes to the lack of chin projection in the pig.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.