• Food Science of Animal Resources
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.470-479
• /
• 2008

This study was carried out to investigate the quality characteristics of brands pork: a crossbred between Korean native and wild pigs (Y), a commercial LYD breed fed with probiotics (J), and a commercial LYD fea without probiotics (M). The moisture and crude ash content of Y treated pork was higher than those for J and M brands, but the crude fat content of J pork was significantly lower (p<0.05) than Y and M brands. The moisture and crude fat contents of Y gilts were higher (p<0.05) than those of barrows. The pH values of Y gilts were higher (p<0.05) than those of gilts of J and M brands. The L and W values of Y pork were lower (p<0.05) than with J and M brands. The springiness value of J pork was significantly higher (p<0.05) than Y and M porks. The sensory scores of Y pork were higher than pork of J and M. The juiciness of gilts of M brands was higher (p<0.05) than for barrows. With regard to the fatty acid profiles among the pork loins, linoleic and arachidonic acid contents of Y pork were higher than with J and M, while the palmitic, pamitoleic, stearic, and oleic acid contents were lower. The saturated fatty acid (SFA) content of Y pork was lower than that for J and M ones, while the unsaturated fatty acids (USFA), essential fatty acids (FFA), USFA/SFA ratio, FFA/SFA ratio, and EFA/USFA ratio were higher. The stearic acid content of M barrows was higher (p<0.05) than that for gilts.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.47 no.4
• /
• pp.365-375
• /
• 2009

Statement of problems: Stress analysis on implant components of the combined screw- and cement-retained implant prosthesis has not investigated yet. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the load distribution characteristics of implant prostheses with the different prosthodontic retention types, such as cement-type, screw-type and combined type by using 3-dimensional finite element analysis. Material and methods: A 3-dimensional finite element model was created in which two SS II implants (Osstem Co. Ltd.) were placed in the areas of the first premolar and the first molar in the mandible, and three-unit fixed partial dentures with four different retention types were fabricated on the two SS II implants. Model 1 was a cement-retained implant restoration made on two cement-retained type abutments (Comocta abutment; Osstem Co. Ltd.), and Model 2 was a screw-retained implant restoration made on the screw-retained type abutments (Octa abutment; Osstem Co. Ltd.). Model 3 was a combined type implant restoration made on the cement-retained type abutment (Comocta abutment) for the first molar and the screw-retained type abutment (Octa abutment) for the first premolar. Lastly, Model 4 was a combined type implant restoration made on the screw-retained type abutment (Octa abutment) for the first molar and the cement-retained type abutment (Comocta abutment) for the first premolar. Average masticatory force was applied on the central fossa in a vertical direction, and on the buccal cusp in a vertical and oblique direction for each model. Von-Mises stress patterns on alveolar bone, implant body, abutment, abutment screw, and prosthetic screw around implant prostheses were evaluated through 3-dimensional finite element analysis. Results: Model 2 showed the lowest von Mises stress. In all models, the von Mises stress distribution of cortical bone, cancellous bone and implant body showed the similar pattern. Regardless of loading conditions and type of abutment system, the stress of bone was concentrated on the cortical bone. The von-Mises stress on abutment, abutment screw, and prosthetic screw showed the lower values for the screw-retained type abutment than for the cement-retained type abutment regardless of the model type. There was little reciprocal effect of the abutment system between the molar and the premolar position. For all models, buccal cusp oblique loading caused the largest stress, followed by buccal cusp vertical loading and center vertical loading. Conclusion: Within the limitation of the FEA study, the combined type implant prosthesis did not demonstrate more stress around implant components than the cement type implant prosthesis. Under the assumption of ideal passive fit, the screw-type implant prosthesis showed the east stress around implant components.