Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 581

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A comparison of the size distribution of collagen fibrils in connective tissues as a function of age and a possible relation between fibril size distribution and mechanical properties

Parry, D. A. D., Barnes, G. R. G., Craig, A. S.·1978·Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences

Abstract

Data on the distribution of collagen fibril diameters in various connective tissues have been collected and analysed for common features. The diameter distributions of the collagen fibrils at birth and in the foetal stages of development are unimodal, whereas at maturity the mass-average diameter of the collagen fibrils is generally larger than at birth and the distributions of fibril sizes may be either unimodal or bimodal depending on the tissue. At senescence, few data are available but in most instances both the mean and mass-average diameters of the collagen fibrils are smaller than those at maturity and the fibril distributions are mainly bimodal. The division between tissues showing unimodal or bimodal fibril distributions at maturity does not simply relate to the type I collagen/type II collagen classification, to the distinction between orientated and unorientated material or indeed directly to the levels of stress and strain encountered by the tissue. However, there may prove to be a relation between a bimodal fibril diameter distribution at maturity and the maintenance over long periods of time of either high stress in stretched tissues or low stress in compressed tissues. It has also been noted that the width of the collagen fibril diameter distribution at birth differs between altricious and precocious animals. The ultimate tensile strength of a connective tissue and the mass-average diameter of the constituent collagen fibrils have been shown to have a positive correlation. Further, the form of the collagen fibril diameter distribution can be directly related to the mechanical properties of the tissue. In particular, it is postulated that the size distribution of the collagen fibrils is largely determined by two factors. First, if the tissue is primarily designed to have high tensile strength, then an increase in the diameter of the collagen fibrils will parallel an increase in the potential density of intrafibrillar covalent crosslinks. Consequently large collagen fibrils are predicted to have a greater tensile strength than small fibrils. Secondly, if the tissue is designed to be elastic and hence withstand creep, then a reduction in the diameter of the collagen fibrils will effectively increase the surface area per unit mass of the fibrils thus enhancing the probability of interfibrillar non-covalent crosslinks between the collagen fibrils and the components of the matrix. The idealized description given may indicate how the mechanical properties of a tissue may be interpreted in terms of the collagen fibril diameter distribution.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspb.1978.0107

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Parry, D. A. D., Barnes, G. R. G., & Craig, A. S.
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences
Published
1978-12-18
Volume
203
Issue
1152
Pages
305-321
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 2053-9193
OpenAlex
W2054705416
Cited by
581
References
0
FWCI
2.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.