Currey John D
Department of Biology, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
J Bone Miner Res. 2003 Apr;18(4):591-8. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.2003.18.4.591.
Because bone is obviously in some way adapted to the loads falling on it and because fracture is usually the failure of mechanical competence of main clinical importance, it is often thought that bones are adapted to resist fracture. In this perspective, I consider that this may not be the case. Bones may be designed to be very stiff, and therefore highly mineralized, and therefore brittle; they may be adapted to normal loads, but not to the characteristic loads occurring in falls, or may be very poorly designed to stop cracks traveling once they have started. Bones may also potentially fail in completely contrasting modes, and therefore their design has to be a compromise that does not resist either mode completely successfully. The greatly differing fracture incidences in different bones seen in pre-senile adults suggest that safety factors have been adapted, over evolutionary time, to produce the best compromise for a host of different design constraints.
由于骨骼显然在某种程度上适应了作用于其上的负荷,而且由于骨折通常是具有主要临床重要性的力学性能失效,所以人们常常认为骨骼是为抵抗骨折而适应的。从这个角度来看,我认为情况可能并非如此。骨骼可能被设计得非常坚硬,因此矿化程度很高,从而很脆;它们可能适应正常负荷,但不适应跌倒时出现的特征性负荷,或者在裂纹一旦开始扩展时阻止其传播的设计可能非常糟糕。骨骼也可能以完全不同的方式失效,因此它们的设计必须是一种折衷方案,无法完全成功地抵抗任何一种方式。在老年前期成年人中不同骨骼的骨折发生率差异很大,这表明在进化过程中,安全系数已经进行了调整,以便在众多不同的设计限制条件下产生最佳的折衷方案。