2007•Revista Odonto CiênciaRequires access

Surface microhardness evaluation of enamel and dentin in bovine and human teeth (permanent and deciduous)

Tiago Aurélio Donassollo, Ana Regina Romano, Flávio Fernando Demarco, Álvaro Della Bona

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the surface microhardness of enamel (E) and dentin (D) from human deciduous molar teeth (Group d), human permanent molar teeth (Group p) and bovine incisor teeth (Group b). Four specimens were selected for each group and stored in saline solution until testing. The specimens were embedded into a resin matrix and polished to 600 grit SiC paper creating a flat enamel surface. The Knoop hardness test was performed in a microhardness device, using a 200 g load. Five measurements were made in each specimen. After that, specimens were polished to expose dentin (near to dentinenamel junction), and other five microhardness measurements were performed per specimen. The values were calculated and statistically analyzed (ANOVA and Tukey tests). Mean hardness values (kg/mm2) and standard deviations were as follows: Ed 338 ± 30.1; Ep 341 ± 32.8; Eb 326 ± 25.5; Dd 104 ± 9.7; Dp 93.3 ± 8.7; Db 91.2 ± 7.3. The microhardness in enamel (E) was statistically higher than in dentin (D) for the three type of teeth studied (p UNITERMS: microhardness; human teeth; bovine teeth.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The objective of this study was to evaluate the surface microhardness of enamel (E) and dentin (D) from human deciduous molar teeth (Group d), human permanent molar teeth (Group p) and bovine incisor teeth (Group b). Four specimens were selected for each group and stored in saline solution until testing. The specimens were embedded into a resin matrix and polished to 600 grit SiC paper creating a flat enamel surface. The Knoop hardness test was performed in a microhardness device, using a 200 g load. Five measurements were made in each specimen. After that, specimens were polished to expose dentin (near to dentinenamel junction), and other five microhardness measurements were performed per specimen. The values were calculated and statistically analyzed (ANOVA and Tukey tests). Mean hardness values (kg/mm2) and standard deviations were as follows: Ed 338 ± 30.1; Ep 341 ± 32.8; Eb 326 ± 25.5; Dd 104 ± 9.7; Dp 93.3 ± 8.7; Db 91.2 ± 7.3. The microhardness in enamel (E) was statistically higher than in dentin (D) for the three type of teeth studied (p UNITERMS: microhardness; human teeth; bovine teeth.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the surface microhardness of enamel (E) and dentin (D) from human deciduous molar teeth (Group d), human permanent molar teeth (Group p) and bovine incisor teeth (Group b). Four specimens were selected for each group and stored in saline solution until testing. The specimens were embedded into a resin matrix and polished to 600 grit SiC paper creating a flat enamel surface. The Knoop hardness test was performed in a microhardness device, using a 200 g load. Five measurements were made in each specimen. After that, specimens were polished to expose dentin (near to dentinenamel junction), and other five microhardness measurements were performed per specimen. The values were calculated and statistically analyzed (ANOVA and Tukey tests). Mean hardness values (kg/mm2) and standard deviations were as follows: Ed 338 ± 30.1; Ep 341 ± 32.8; Eb 326 ± 25.5; Dd 104 ± 9.7; Dp 93.3 ± 8.7; Db 91.2 ± 7.3. The microhardness in enamel (E) was statistically higher than in dentin (D) for the three type of teeth studied (p UNITERMS: microhardness; human teeth; bovine teeth.

Key concepts: Knoop hardness test, Enamel paint, Dentin, Indentation hardness, Molar, Dentistry, Materials science, Deciduous teeth

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Surface microhardness evaluation of enamel and dentin in bovine and human teeth (permanent and deciduous) — Research Paper | ScholarLens