2002
DOI: 10.1002/1521-4079(200211)37:11<1234::aid-crat1234>3.0.co;2-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determination of the Bone Mineral Crystallite Size and Lattice Strain from Diffraction Line Broadening

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
84
0
4

Year Published

2008
2008
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 177 publications
(97 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
8
84
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…This allowed to calculate the values of L and e with accuracy of about 30-50% [22,23]. In order to provide more precise calculations of L and e values with the accuracy of about 11-16% the three-fold convolution method was used [24,25].…”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 62%
“…This allowed to calculate the values of L and e with accuracy of about 30-50% [22,23]. In order to provide more precise calculations of L and e values with the accuracy of about 11-16% the three-fold convolution method was used [24,25].…”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 62%
“…The average values for the crystallite sizes are ~20.1 nm, ~20.4 nm, and ~20.8 nm for the spinous process, lateral processes, and spine base, respectively. These crystallite sizes are similar to that of bovine femur bone [50]. It is of note that while other fish scales have been known to contain calcite as mentioned in Section 2.2.3, no calcite was found in the porcupine fish spines.…”
Section: X-ray Diffractionsupporting
confidence: 74%
“…Figure 1 The crystalline sizes of the synthesized Gel-HAP were calculated from the observed XRD patterns using the Debye-Scherer equation [37][38]. Calculated particle sizes (in nm) for the various gelatin concentrations, ultrasonic power and temperatures are tabulated in Table 1.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%