Due to a production error, the value of the Loss Modulus Data Type, for the Human species in the last column of Table 2, was erroneously changed.
Table 2
| Species | Paper | Technique | Sample size | Data type | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Human | This study | Shear rheometry | n = 23 | Storage modulus | G′ = 6.5 ± 3.0 Pa |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.96 ± 0.47 Pa | ||||
| Shafaie et al., | Shear rheometry | n = 3 | Storage modulus | G′ = 1.4 ± 0.95 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.7 ± 0.37 Pa | ||||
| Lee et al., | Microrheometry | n = 20 | Internal elastic modulus | 1.2–2.5 Pa | |
| Weber et al., | Periodic oscillations | n = 8 | Spring constant | D0/r2π = 76,000 ± 8,200 N/m3 | |
| Damping factor | rz/r2 = 2,940 ± 380 N*s/m | ||||
| Zimmerman, | Light scattering | n = 6 | Elastic shear modulus | 0.05 Pa | |
| Porcine | This study | Shear rheometry | n = 15 | Storage modulus | G′ = 5.0 ± 0.58 Pa |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.65 ± 0.22 Pa | ||||
| Shafaie et al., | Shear rheometry | n = 3 | Storage modulus | G′ = 1.4 ± 0.14 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.4 ± 0.14 Pa | ||||
| Filas et al., | Shear rheometry | n = 8 | Storage modulus | G′ = 4–10 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 1–2 Pa | ||||
| Sharif-Kashani et al., | Shear rheometry | n = 3 | Storage modulus | G′ = 1.1 ± 0.2 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.3 ± 0.1 Pa | ||||
| Swindle-Reilly et al., | Capillary rheometry | n = 87 | Storage modulus | G′ = 0.3–8 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.2–3 Pa | ||||
| Swindle et al., | Capillary rheometry | n = 15 | Storage modulus | G′ = 0.07–2 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.08–0.8 Pa | ||||
| Elastic Modulus | E = 57.3 ± 5.5 Pa | ||||
| Nickerson et al., , | Shear rheometry | n = 9 | Storage modulus | G′ = 2.8 ± 0.9 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.7 ± 0.4 Pa | ||||
| Lee et al., | Microrheometry | n = 20 | Internal elastic modulus | 0.8–1.0 Pa | |
| Shafaie et al., | Shear rheometry | n = 3 | Storage modulus | G′ = l.7 ± 0.31Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.7 ± 0.12 Pa | ||||
| Filas et al., | Shear rheometry | n = 8 | Storage modulus | G′ = 10–23 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 5 Pa | ||||
| Zimberlin et al., | Cavitation rheology | n = 5–10 | Storage modulus | G′ = 660 Pa (in vivo) | |
| G′ = 120 Pa (ex vivo) | |||||
| Bovine | Nickerson et al., , | Shear rheometry | n = 17 | Storage modulus | G′ = 7.0 ± 2.0 Pa |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 2.2 ± 0.6 Pa | ||||
| Lee et al., | Microrheometry | n = 20 | Internal elastic modulus | 1.2–2.7 Pa | |
| Tokita et al., | Torsion pendulum | Storage modulus | G′ = 0.l−1 Pa | ||
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.1–1 Pa | ||||
| Weber et al., | Periodic oscillations | n = 8 | Spring constant | D0/r2π = 60,000 ± 6,000 N/m3 | |
| Damping factor | rz/r2 2,815 ± 264 N*s/m | ||||
| Bettelheim and Wang, | Compression chucks | n = 5 | Storage modulus | G′ = 4.2–4.6 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 1.9–3.6 Pa | ||||
| Leporine | Silva et al., | Shear rheometry | n = 14 | Storage modulus | G′ = 1.86 ± 1.14 Pa |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.61 ± 0.39 Pa | ||||
| Watts et al., | Microrheometry | n = 10 | Storage modulus | G′ = 0.014–0.14 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 0.006–0.11 Pa | ||||
| Ovine | Shafaie et al., | Shear rheometry | n = 3 | Storage modulus | G′ = 4.2 ± 0.62 Pa |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 2.3 ± 0.56 Pa | ||||
| Colter et al., | Shear rheometry | n = 30 | Storage modulus | G′ = 10–170 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 10–170.86 Pa | ||||
| Hircine | Suri and Banerjee, | Shear rheometry | Storage modulus | G′ = 1,000 Pa | |
| Loss modulus | G″ = 400 Pa |
Summaries of rheological data of the vitreous humor.
The publisher apologizes for this mistake. The original article has been updated.
References
1
BettelheimF. A.WangT. J. Y. (1976). Dynamic viscoelastic properties of bovine vitreous. Exp. Eye Res.23, 435–441. 10.1016/0014-4835(76)90172-X
2
ColterJ.WilliamsA.MoranP.CoatsB. (2015). Age-related changes in dynamic moduli of ovine vitreous. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater.41, 315–324. 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2014.09.004
3
FilasB. A.ZhangQ.OkamotoR. J.ShuiY.BeebeD. C. (2014). Enzymatic degradation identifies components responsible for the structural properties of the vitreous body. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.55, 55–63. 10.1167/iovs.13-13026
4
LeeB.LittM.BuchsbaumG. (1992). Rheology of the vitreous body. Part I: viscoelasticity of human vitreous. Biorheology29, 521–533. 10.3233/BIR-1992-295-612
5
LeeB.LittM.BuchsbaumG. (1994). Rheology of the vitreous body: Part 3. Concentration of electrolytes, collagen and hyaluronic acid. Biorheology31, 339–351. 10.3233/BIR-1994-31404
6
NickersonC. S.KarageozianH. L.ParkJ.KornfieldJ. A. (2005). Internal tension: a novel hypothesis concerning the mechanical properties of the vitreous humor. Macromol. Symp.227, 183–189. 10.1122/1.1917846
7
NickersonC. S.ParkJ.KornfieldJ. A.KarageozianH. (2008). Rheological properties of the vitreous and the role of hyaluronic acid. J. Biomech.41, 1840–1846. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.04.015
8
ShafaieS.HutterV.BrownM. B.CookM. T.ChauD. Y. (2018). Diffusion through the ex vivo vitreal body–Bovine, porcine, and ovine models are poor surrogates for the human vitreous. Int. J. Pharm.550, 207–215. 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2018.07.070
9
Sharif-KashaniP.HubschmanJ. P.SassoonD.KavehpourH. P. (2011). Rheology of the vitreous gel: effects of macromolecule organization on the viscoelastic properties. J. Biomech.44, 419–423. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.10.002
10
SilvaA. F.AlvesM. A.OliveiraM. S. N. (2017). Rheological behaviour of vitreous humour. Rheol. Acta56, 377–386. 10.1007/s00397-017-0997-0
11
SuriS.BanerjeeR. (2006). In vitro evaluation of in situ gels as short term vitreous substitutes. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A79, 650–664. 10.1002/jbm.a.30917
12
SwindleK. E.HamiltonP. D.RaviN. (2008). In situ formation of hydrogels as vitreous substitutes: viscoelastic comparison to porcine vitreous. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A87, 656–665. 10.1002/jbm.a.31769
13
Swindle-ReillyK. E.ShahM.HamiltonP. D.EskinT. A.KaushalS.RaviN. (2009). Rabbit Study of an in situ forming hydrogel vitreous substitute. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.50, 4840–4846. 10.1167/iovs.08-2891
14
TokitaM.FujiyaY.HikichiK. (1984). Dynamic viscoelasticity of bovine vitreous body. Biorheology21, 751–756. 10.3233/BIR-1984-21602
15
WattsF.TanL. E.WilsonC. G.GirkinJ. M.TassieriM.WrightA. J. (2014). Investigating the micro-rheology of the vitreous humor using an optically trapped local probe. J. Opt. 16:015301. 10.1088/2040-8978/16/1/015301
16
WeberH.LandwehrG.KilpH.NeubauerH. (1982). The mechanical properties of the vitreous of pig and human donor eyes. Ophthalmic Res.14, 335–343. 10.1159/000265211
17
WeberH.LandwehrG.KilpH.NeubauerH. (1982). The mechanical properties of the vitreous of pig and human donor eyes. Ophthalmic Res.14, 335–343. 10.1159/000265211
18
ZimberlinJ. A.McManusJ. J.CrosbyA. J. (2010). Cavitation rheology of the vitreous: mechanical properties of biological tissue. Soft Matter6, 3632–3635. 10.1039/B925407B
19
ZimmermanR. L. (1980). In vivo measurements of the viscoelasticity of the human vitreous humor. Biophys. J.29, 539–544. 10.1016/S0006-3495(80)85152-6
Summary
Keywords
rheometry, vitreous, aging, ocular biomechanics, liquefaction, eye, viscoelasticity, floaters
Citation
Frontiers Production Office (2019) Erratum: Rheological Properties and Age-Related Changes of the Human Vitreous Humor. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 7:44. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00044
Received
20 February 2019
Accepted
21 February 2019
Published
15 March 2019
Approved by
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland
Volume
7 - 2019
Updates
Copyright
© 2019 Frontiers Production Office.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Frontiers Production Office production.office@frontiersin.org
This article was submitted to Biomechanics, a section of the journal Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.