Publication:
Analysis of fractal dimensions of rat bones from film and digital images

dc.contributor.authorS. Pornprasertsuken_US
dc.contributor.authorJ. B. Ludlowen_US
dc.contributor.authorR. L. Webberen_US
dc.contributor.authorD. A. Tyndallen_US
dc.contributor.authorM. Yamauchien_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of North Carolina School of Dentistryen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherWake Forest Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherThe University of North Carolina at Chapel Hillen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-07T09:40:31Z
dc.date.available2018-09-07T09:40:31Z
dc.date.issued2001-12-01en_US
dc.description.abstractObjectives: (1) To compare the effect of two different intra-oral image receptors on estimates of fractal dimension; and (2) to determine the variations in fractal dimensions between the femur, tibia and humerus of the rat and between their proximal, middle and distal regions. Methods: The left femur, tibia and humerus from 24 4-6-month-old Sprague-Dawley rats were radiographed using intra-oral film and a charge-coupled device (CCD). Films were digitized at a pixel density comparable to the CCD using a flat-bed scanner. Square regions of interest were selected from proximal, middle, and distal regions of each bone. Fractal dimensions were estimated from the slope of regression lines fitted to plots of log power against log spatial frequency. Results: The fractal dimensions estimates from digitized films were significantly greater than those produced from the CCD (P = 0.0008). Estimated fractal dimensions of three types of bone were not significantly different (P = 0.0544); however, the three regions of bones were significantly different (P = 0.0239). The fractal dimensions estimated from radiographs of the proximal and distal regions of the bones were lower than comparable estimates obtained from the middle region. Conclusions: Different types of image receptors significantly affect estimates of fractal dimension. There was no difference in the fractal dimensions of the different bones but the three regions differed significantly.en_US
dc.identifier.citationDentomaxillofacial Radiology. Vol.30, No.3 (2001), 179-183en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600597en_US
dc.identifier.issn0250832Xen_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-0035347112en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/26523
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=0035347112&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectDentistryen_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleAnalysis of fractal dimensions of rat bones from film and digital imagesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=0035347112&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections