Many cell types will grow when attached to a rigid surface but not in suspension, a phenomenon termed „anchorage dependence”︁. Anchorage dependence can be studied by incorporating solid particles of varying size into gels. It has been found that colonies will form on glass fibrils 500 μ in length, but not in the presence of silica fragments smaller than the cells. This shows that the suspending medium is not itself inhibitory, and confirms the requirement for a rigid surface of adequate size.
The state of inhibited cells in suspension culture was examined by dispersing them in a methyl cellulose gel, in vessels lined with agar. In this system aggregation is prevented and the cells may be recovered quantitatively. Normal, as well as transformed, cells increase in size, and a proportion synthetize DNA during the first 24 hours in suspension culture. Growth and DNA synthesis in normal cells then virtually cease, while transformed cells continue to grow into colonies. The stationary normal cells remain competent for further growth for at least a week in suspension. When such cells are allowed to attach to a rigid surface in the presence of colchicine, DNA synthesis occurs and is followed by mitosis. These results indicate that suspended cells are blocked between mitosis and the end of the S phase of the cycle.
To anchor is to hold or resist the movement of an object; anchorage is the gaining of that hold. In orthodontics, terms such as “critical anchorage”, “noncritical anchorage”, or “burning anchorage” are often used to describe the degree of difficulty of space closure. Anchorage may be defined as the amount of movement of the posterior teeth (molars, premolars) to close the extraction space (Fig. 10-1A) in order to achieve selected treatment goals. Therefore, the barrier anchorage needs of an individual treatment plan could vary from absolutely no permitted mesial movement of the molars/premolars (or even distal movement of the molars required) to complete space closure by protraction of the posterior teeth.
When designing large structural components it’s critical to make an informed decision between castings and forgings. The following paper by Rexnord provides an in-depth examination.
Material selection is one of the most crucial decisions made in the design, manufacture, and application of large structural components. Material selection naturally influences the entire performance of the design, and thus it is critical that informed decisions are made during the design stage. Steel castings and steel forgings are two alternatives for large structural components. For many design engineers it is often assumed that a forging is a better product because it is formed or worked during the manufacturing process. It also assumed that castings are inferior because they may contain porosity. Nothing could be further from the truth. Each process has its advantages and disadvantages. It is just as possible to produce an inferior product whether it is a forging or a casting. This paper will present an honest evaluation of castings and mining forgings, so that those in the design community can make an informed choice.
This paper will concern itself with the differences between forged and cast steels in heavy sections. Heavy sections will be interpreted to mean parts in excess of 10 tons and a minimum metal section of 200 mm (5”). All steel products, whether they are cast or wrought (forged), start from a batch of molten steel that is allowed to solidify in a mold. The difference is that a wrought product is mechanically worked by processes such as rolling or forging after solidification, while a casting is not.