Dental nomenclature follows Ginsburg [17 ] and Smith and Dodson [18 ]. Anatomical descriptions are based primarily on Scapino [19 ], Turnbull [20 ], Barone [21 , 22 ], Waibl et al. [23 ], Evans and de Lahunta [24 , 25 ], and Hartstone-Rose et al. [26 ]. The terminology conforms to the standard of the Nomina anatomica Veterinaria [23 ] with the exception of the masseter and temporalis muscle complexes for which we follow Hartstone-Rose et al. [26 ]. The Megalictis material (Figs 1 –4 ) has been compared to all the other material of Megalictis and Paroligobunis on the basis of published descriptions, figures, measurements and photographs. We have re-measured the dentition of AMNH 12880 and 22632 (cast of CM 1590) measured initially by Matthew [1 ] and Peterson [5 ] and completed the measures of Paroligobunis petersoni Loomis, 1932 [27 ] using a cast TMM 40966–1. Measurements were made using Mitutoyo Absolute digital calipers to the nearest 0.1 mm (Tables 1 and 2 ).
Absolute digital caliper
Manufactured by Mitutoyo
Sourced in Japan
The Absolute digital caliper is a precision measuring instrument used to accurately measure the dimensions of objects. It features a digital display that provides precise measurements in both metric and imperial units. The caliper's jaws can be used to measure the internal, external, depth, and step dimensions of a variety of objects.
Automatically generated - may contain errors
6 protocols using absolute digital caliper
1
Detailed Anatomical Analysis of Megalictis
2
Detailed Fossil Dental Analysis
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The specimens newly described here are all housed in the collection of John Day Fossil Beds National Monument. Comparisons made in this article are based primarily on study of casts of fossils at other institutions, supplemented by published photographs and drawings. Dental nomenclature used in comparative descriptions follows that of Szalay (1976) and a labeled illustration is included as a Supporting Information figure (Fig. S1). Upper teeth are designated by capital letters and lower teeth by lower-case letters (e.g., M1 and m1). Measurements represent maximum lengths and widths taken at the occlusal surface. These measurements were taken using Mitutoyo Absolute digital calipers to the nearest 0.
3
Fruit Morphological and Biochemical Analysis
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
At the anthesis, flowers were tagged, and fruits were collected at 40 days post-anthesis (DPA) from each accession for measuring morphological and biochemical analysis. The fruits from most accessions at 40 DPA were at the red ripe stage except non-ripening mutants. After harvest, the fruit weight and diameter was measured. The fruit diameter was measured both in vertical and horizontal axis using a digital Vernier caliper (Mitutoyo Absolute Digital Caliper, Japan). Thereafter fruits were homogenized using mortar and pestle, filtered through a sieve and the pH of the homogenate was measured with a pH meter. A 300 μL aliquot of the homogenate was used for measuring the TSS using a refractometer (Atago ® Pocket Refractometer PAL-1, Japan) calibrated with 300 μL milliQ water.
4
Micro Push-out Bond Strength of Fiber Posts
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
After keeping the specimen at 37°C and 100% humidity in an incubator (Thermo Scientific™ Heratherm™; Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.) for 24 h, 1‐mm‐thick disk‐shaped sections from coronal and apical third of the root were cut using a diamond disk (Mecatome; Presi). To consider the same level of the canal at the coronal or apical part, teeth were chosen with the same length and embedded in resin. The thickness of the specimen was measured using a Mitutoyo absolute digital caliper (Mitutoyo Corp.) with an accuracy of 0.001 mm. The diameter of the post on each specimen was measured by a calibrated microscope for push‐out test calculations.
The specimens (dental slices) were placed in the universal testing machine (Zwick Roell; Z020). The diameter of the jig was adjusted to 0.8 mm. The test was performed only by applying force to the fiber posts and not to the resin cement or dentin. The force was applied to the specimens at a speed of 1 mm/min in the apical–coronal direction until the specimens’ failure. The bond strength of each piece was calculated by megapascals using the following formula:
where r1 is the post radius at the coronal level, r2 the post radius on the other level, and h the thickness of each piece.
The specimens (dental slices) were placed in the universal testing machine (Zwick Roell; Z020). The diameter of the jig was adjusted to 0.8 mm. The test was performed only by applying force to the fiber posts and not to the resin cement or dentin. The force was applied to the specimens at a speed of 1 mm/min in the apical–coronal direction until the specimens’ failure. The bond strength of each piece was calculated by megapascals using the following formula:
where r1 is the post radius at the coronal level, r2 the post radius on the other level, and h the thickness of each piece.
5
Microtensile Bond Strength Evaluation
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Specimens were sectioned with a precision low-speed diamond saw to obtain sticks with a cross-sectional area of 0.8 ± 0.1 mm2. An absolute digital caliper (Mitutoyo Corp., Kanagawa, Japan) with an accuracy of 0.001 mm was used to measure both sides of the adhesive interface. The bonding area was calculated in mm2 automatically by the Instron software. Each stick was tested individually by attaching them to a microtensile jig using a cyanoacrylate glue (Zapit Accelerator Dental Ventures of America Inc., Corona, CA, USA). All sticks were then subjected to a microtensile load (100N) using a universal testing machine (Instron Co., Canton, MA, USA) at 1 mm/min crosshead speed. The load (N) and the bonding surface area were registered and the microtensile bond strength calculated in MPa by the BlueHill program software. Failures were evaluated using the Zeiss stereoscopic microscope at ×10 magnification and classified as adhesive, cohesive, mixed, or debonded.
6
Measuring Filter Paper Thickness
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The thickness of the manufactured filter papers was evaluated using a Mitutoyo Absolute digital caliper (ID-C150XB) with a precision of 1 µm. The thickness was measured on five different filters at five different positions on each filter. The results presented in Supporting Information Table S1 .
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!