| Durham Anthropology Journal Volume 12(2-3) Copyright © 2005, Masashi TAKAHASHI(1), Shinichi GOTO(2), Jin Hua ZHENG(3), and Kan KOBAYASHI(3) |
Masashi TAKAHASHI(1), Shinichi GOTO(2), Jin Hua ZHENG(3), and Kan KOBAYASHI(3)
Figures
Fig. 1 Scanning electron micrograph at the boundary between the thick rodless enamelof the surface layer (S) and outer enamel (O) of the buccolingual ground section, etched with HCl, of the enamel projection. Arrow head indicates the exact boundary. Scale bar is5 m.
Fig. 2 Scanning electron micrograph of the surface, treated with NaOCl, at the tip part of the enamel projection. Scale bar is10 m.
Fig. 3 Comparison of calcium content, analyzed with EPMA, of the middle enamels, without any etching, at the tip part of the enamel projection, middle part, and cuspal part.The measurements indicate means and 95% confidence intervals.
Fig. 4 Comparison of phosphorus content at the same location of the same specimen as shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 5 Comparison of oxygen content at the same location of the same specimen as shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 6 Comparison of carbon content at the same location of the same specimen as shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 7 Comparison of sodium content at the same location of the same specimen as shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 8 Comparison of magnesium content at the same location of the same specimen as shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 9 Comparison of fluorine content at the same location of the same specimen as shown in Fig. 3.