Premium
The SEM electron‐mirror effect in human tooth and synthetic hydroxyapatite samples
Author(s) -
ReyesGasga José,
RodríguezTorres José Antonio,
VargasBecerril Nancy,
MorenoRios Marisa,
RodríguezGómez Arturo,
GarcíaGarcía Ramiro
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
microscopy research and technique
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.536
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1097-0029
pISSN - 1059-910X
DOI - 10.1002/jemt.23092
Subject(s) - enamel paint , dentin , materials science , scanning electron microscope , calcination , polyethylene terephthalate , composite material , tooth enamel , dentistry , chemistry , organic chemistry , medicine , catalysis
The characteristics of the electron‐mirror effect (EME) image depend on both the scanning electron microscope parameters and the sample's physical properties. The behavior of human tooth (dentin and enamel) and synthetic hydroxyapatite samples submitted to the EME procedure is presented in this work. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and epoxy resin, two good EME producers, were used for comparison. A distorted EME image was observed in the obtained dentin's surface, but enamel and synthetic hydroxyapatite surfaces did not produce the EME. After ex situ calcination treatments of the teeth at 700 and 1,200°C, the EME was observed in dentin, enamel, and synthetic hydroxyapatite, but highly deformed EME images were produced. We show that these last observations are the result of the well‐known charge‐edge effect. After EME analysis, the calculated dielectric constant was 8.7 for dentin and 3.8 for PET. Research Highlights Electron‐mirror effect (EME) was observed in dentin but not in enamel or synthetic hydroxyapatite. Highly deformed EME images are produced in all samples after calcination at above 700°C. For dentin the calculated dielectric constant was 8.7 and for PET is was 3.8.