Enamel forms the outer surface of teeth, which are of complex shape and are loaded in a multitude of ways during function. Enamel has previously been assumed to be formed from discrete rods and to be markedly aniostropic, but marked anisotropy might be expected to lead to frequent fracture. Since frequent fracture is not observed, we measured enamel organization using histology, imaging, and fracture mechanics modalities, and compared enamel with crystalline hydroxyapatite (Hap), its major component. Enamel was approximately three times tougher than geologic Hap, demonstrating the critical importance of biological manufacturing. Only modest levels of enamel anisotropy were discerned; rather, our measurements suggest that enamel is a composite ceramic with the crystallites oriented in a complex three-dimensional continuum. Geologic apatite crystals are much harder than enamel, suggesting that inclusion of biological contaminants, such as protein, influences the properties of enamel. Based on our findings, we propose a new structural model.
Ashby MF (1993). Materials selection in mechanical design. New York: Pergamon Press, p. 36.
2.
Boyde A. (1979). Carbonate concentration, crystal centers, core dissolution, caries, cross striations, circadian rhythms, and compositional contrast in the SEM. In: Tooth enamel III. Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Tooth Enamel, its Development, Structure, and Composition. Nylen MU, Termine JD, editors. JDent Res 58(Spec Iss B):981-983.
3.
Boyde A. (1987). A 3-D model of enamel development at the scale of one inch to the micron. Adv Dent Res1:135-140.
4.
Boyde A. (1997). Microstructure of enamel. In: Ciba Foundation Symposium 205, Dental Enamel. Chadwick DJ, Cardew G, editors. New York: Wiley, pp. 18-31.
5.
Clark SP Jr, editor (1966). Memorandum 97. Handbook of physical constants. New York : Geological Society of America.
6.
Craig RG, Peyton FA, Johnson W. (1961). Compressive properties of enamel, dental cements, and gold. J Dent Res40:936-943.
7.
Fincham AG, Moradian-Oldak J., Diekwisch TG, Lyaruu DM, Wright JT, Bringas P. Jr, et al. (1995). Evidence for amelogenin "nanospheres" as functional components of secretory-stage enamel matrix. J Struct Biol115:50-59.
8.
Hanaizumi Y., Kawano Y., Ohshima H., Hoshino M., Takeuchi K., Maeda T. (1998). Three dimensional direction and interrelationship of prisms in cuspal and cervical enamel of dog tooth. Anat Rec252:355-368.
9.
Hassan R., Caputo AA, Bunshaw RF (1981). Fracture toughness of human enamel. J Dent Res60:820-827.
10.
HelmckeJ-G.1967). Ultrastructure of enamel. In: Structural and chemical organization of teeth. Vol. II. Miles AEW, editor. New York: Academic Press, pp. 135-163.
11.
Hu CC, Fukae M., Uchida T., Qian Q., Zhang CH, Ryu OH, et al. (1997). Sheathlin: cloning, cDNA/polypeptide sequences, and immunolocalization of porcine enamel sheath proteins. J Dent Res76:648-657.
12.
Lawn B. ( 1993). Fracture of brittle solids. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 55.
13.
Lowenstam HA, Weiner S. (1989). On biomineralization. New York : Oxford University Press, p. 175.
14.
Nanci A., Warshawsky H. (1984). Characterization of putative secretory sites on ameloblasts of the rat incisor. Am J Anat171:163-189.
15.
Paine ML, Krebsbach PH, Chen LS, Paine CT, Yamada Y., Deutsch D., et al. (1998). Protein-to-protein interactions: criteria defining the assembly of the enamel organic matrix. J Dent Res77:496-502.
16.
Rasmussen ST, Patchin RE, Scott DB, Heuer AH (1976). Fracture properties of human enamel and dentin . J Dent Res55:154-164.
17.
Risnes (1987). Multiplane sectioning and scanning electron microscopy as a method for studying the three-dimensional structure of mature dental enamel. Scanning Microsc1:1893-1902.
18.
Risnes S. (1998). Growth tracks in dental enamel. J Human Evol35:331-350.
19.
Robinson C., Weatherell JA, Hallsworth AS (1971). Variation in composition of dental enamel within thin ground tooth sections. Caries Res5:44-57.
20.
Sarikaya M., Liu J., Aksay IA (1995). Nacre: properties, crystallography, morphology, and formation. In: Biomimetics design and processing of materials . Sarikaya M, Aksay IA, editors. New York: American Institute of Physics.
21.
Shellis RP (1996). A scanning electron-microscopic study of solubility variations in human enamel and dentine. Arch Oral Biol41 :473-484.
22.
Smith CE (1998). Cellular and chemical events during enamel maturation . Crit Rev Oral Biol Med9:128-161.
23.
Spears IR, van Noort R., Crompton RH, Cardew GE, Howard IC (1993). The effects of enamel anisotropy on the distribution of stress in a tooth. J Dent Res72:1526-1531.
24.
Wang R. ( 1998). Fracture toughness and interfacial design of a biological fiber-matrix ceramic composite in sea urchin teeth. J Am Ceram Soc81:1037-1040.
25.
Warshawsky H., Smith CE (1971). A three-dimensional reconstruction of the rods in rat maxillary incisor enamel. Anat Rec169:585-591.
26.
Warshawsky H., Josephsen K., Thylstrup A., Fejerskov O (1981). The development of enamel structure in rat incisors as compared to the teeth of monkey and man. Anat Rec200:371-399.
27.
White SN, Paine ML, Luo W., Sarikaya M., Fong H., Yu Z., et al. (2000). The dentino-enamel junction is broad transitional zone uniting dissimilar bioceramic composites. JAm Ceram Soc83:238-240.
28.
Wright JT, Hall K., Yamauchi M. (1997). The protein composition of normal and developmentally defective enamel. In: Ciba Foundation Symposium 205, Dental Enamel. Chadwick DJ, Cardew G, editors. New York: Wiley, pp. 85-106.
29.
Xu HH, Smith DT, Jahanmir S., Romberg E., Kelly JR, Thompson VP, et al. (1998). Indentation damage and mechanical properties of human enamel and dentin. J Dent Res77:472-480.
30.
Yettram AL, Wright Kwj, Pickard HM (1976). Finite element stress analysis of the crowns of normal and restored teeth. J Dent Res55:1004-1011.
31.
Yoon HS, Newham RE (1969). Elastic properties of fluorapatite. Am Miner54:1193-1197.
