| Literature DB >> 28536534 |
Alexander Tsouknidas1,2, Lucia Jimenez-Rojo3, Evangelos Karatsis4, Nikolaos Michailidis2, Thimios A Mitsiadis3.
Abstract
Mice are arguably the dominant model organisms for studies investigating the effect of genetic traits on the pathways to mammalian skull and teeth development, thus being integral in exploring craniofacial and dental evolution. The aim of this study is to analyse the functional significance of masticatory loads on the mouse mandible and identify critical stress accumulations that could trigger phenotypic and/or growth alterations in mandible-related structures. To achieve this, a 3D model of mouse skulls was reconstructed based on Micro Computed Tomography measurements. Upon segmenting the main hard tissue components of the mandible such as incisors, molars and alveolar bone, boundary conditions were assigned on the basis of the masticatory muscle architecture. The model was subjected to four loading scenarios simulating different feeding ecologies according to the hard or soft type of food and chewing or gnawing biting movement. Chewing and gnawing resulted in varying loading patterns, with biting type exerting a dominant effect on the stress variations experienced by the mandible and loading intensity correlating linearly to the stress increase. The simulation provided refined insight on the mechanobiology of the mouse mandible, indicating that food consistency could influence micro evolutionary divergence patterns in mandible shape of rodents.Entities:
Keywords: biomechanics; craniofacial evolution; incisor; mandible; modeling; molar; rodents; tooth
Year: 2017 PMID: 28536534 PMCID: PMC5422518 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00273
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
Material properties of the rodent's mandible.
| Cortical bone (Williams and Edmundson, | 19.92 | 0.3 |
| Alveolar Bone (Yu et al., | 0.345 | 0.38 |
| Enamel (Yu et al., | 84.1 | 0.33 |
| Dentin (Yu et al., | 18.6 | 0.31 |
| Pulp (Yu et al., | 0.002 | 0.45 |
| Mesenchyme (Rees and Jacobsen, | 0.1 | 0.37 |
| Periodontal ligament (Rees, | 0.05 | 0.45 |
Figure 13D skull model of the mouse and mandible considered during the analysis.
Loads applied for each biting scenario.
| Superoinferior [Fz] | 0.84 | 2.5 | 0.42 | 1.26 |
| Anteroposterior [Fx] | 0 | 0 | 0.42 | 1.26 |
Figure 2Muscle attachment, load application and joint surfaces considered during the analyses: (A) lingual view and (B) buccal view.
Figure 3Characteristic stress field developing in the mandible for a gnawing and a chewing scenario (hard pellets).
Figure 4Stress variations experienced by the incisor and molars for (A) the chewing scenario and (B) the gnawing scenario.
Figure 5(A) Overview of the max. developing von Mises stress calculated at the periodontal ligament during the four loading scenarios and (B) characteristic developing stress fields during gnawing and chewing.