On image.Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22,three of(a)(b)(c)(d)Figure Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, x FOR PEER Review 1. Field emission scanning electron microscope pictures of each bovine bone scaffold: Particle 4 of 14 bovine bone scaffold ((a,b); original Hexythiazox-d11 Formula magnification 50 2000 respectively), Block bovine bone scaffold ((c,d); original magnification 50 2000 respectively).Figure two. Three-dimensional reconstruction pictures observed with micro-computed tomography (CT) Metronidazole-d3 Anti-infection evaluation of particle Figure 2. Three-dimensional reconstruction photos observed with micro-computed tomography (-CT) evaluation of particle (P), block (B), P bone morphogenetic protein (BMP), and BBMP group showed the newly formed bone (green (P), block (B), P bone morphogenetic protein (BMP), and BBMP group showed the newly formed bone (green light) and light) and grafted bone scaffold (white light). grafted bone scaffold (white light).The results on the -CT analysis for each group are shown in Figure 3. The average The results on the CT analysis for each group are shown in Figure 3. The average bone volumes (BVs) in the particle, block, PBMP, and BBMP groups have been 60.42 20.35, bone volumes (BVs) from the particle, block, PBMP, and BBMP groups had been 60.42 20.35, 94.46 20.05, 129.87 21.92, and 213.76 70.45 mm3, respectively, at six weeks following the operation (Figure 3a). Significant differences had been observed amongst the BVs of BBMP plus the other groups (p 0.000). The BV with the BBMP group was drastically greater than that in the particle (p = 0.000), block (p = 0.002), and PBMP groups (p = 0.007). The BV on the PBMP group was significantly greater than that in the particle group (p = 0.04). TheInt. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22,four of94.46 20.05, 129.87 21.92, and 213.76 70.45 mm3 , respectively, at six weeks just after the operation (Figure 3a). Considerable differences had been observed in between the BVs of BBMP plus the other groups (p 0.000). The BV on the BBMP group was substantially higher than that on the particle (p = 0.000), block (p = 0.002), and PBMP groups (p = 0.007). The BV with the PBMP group was drastically higher than that on the particle group (p = 0.04). The typical bone mineral densities (BMDs) on the particle, block, PBMP, and BBMP groups mg/cc, Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, x FOR PEER Evaluation have been 748.17 37.56, 729.14 40.35, 768.08 78.52, and 681.17 103.36 5 of 14 respectively. No substantial distinction was observed in BMD among the 4 groups (p 0.05) (Figure 3b).(a)(b)(c)(d)Figure three. Micro-computed tomography evaluation: (a) Bone volume (BV), (b) Bone mineral density Figure 3. Micro-computed tomography evaluation: (a) Bone volume (BV), (b) Bone mineral density (BMD), (c) Trabecular thickness (TbTh), and (d) Trabecular spacing (TbSp) with the the particle (P), (BMD), (c) Trabecular thickness (TbTh), and (d) Trabecular spacing (TbSp) with the the particle (P), block (B), P bone morphogenetic protein (BMP), and BBMP groups. Significant differences had been block (B), P bone morphogenetic protein (BMP), and BBMP groups. Important differences were observed in the BV values ( p 0.05, p 0.001). observed in the BV values ( p 0.05, p 0.001).two.three. Adipose Tissue Formation inthickness (TbTh) valuesGroups particle, block, PBMP, and also the average trabecular the PBMP and BBMP from the Void and vacant 0.46 0.03, 0.49 0.01, 0.50 0.13, and 0.58 0.08 mm, respectively BBMP groups have been spaces are shown within the sectional image from the -CT analysis (Figure 4a). The void space was assumedof the formed by the formation of than that of your o.