Talk:Tectorial membrane

Anatomy: Microanatomy Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to microanatomy.

Material parameters

The statement about the TM being "inconceivably delicate and flexible; far more sensitively flexible in the transverse than in the longitudinal direction and the readiness with which it bends when touched is beyond description." is clearly wrong. I know of no substances that are inconceivably flexible, neither of any substances which compliance to bending are beyind description. Now, me not having heard of them is in itself is no argument, but I would think that an appropriate choice of material parameters definitely describes the TM. I would like to draw attention to, e.g., the following papers:
J. W. Gu et al., "Frequency-dependent shear impedance of the tectorial membrane", Biophys. J. 95, 2008, (pp. 2529-2538)
J. J. Zwislocki and L. K. Cefaratti, "Tectorial membrane. II Stiffness measurement in vivo", Hear. Res. 42, 1989, (pp. 211–228)
Both papers quantify the "inconceivable" flexibility and "readiness of bending".

Furthermore, I don't think I've seen a single paper using the latin terms ("limbus laminæ spiralis", "Membrana tectoria"), but that might be me coming into this from a biophysicist's point of view. If someone manages to come up with support for the "inconceivability" of, e.g., the beanding and shear stiffnesses, please cite that. In the meanwhile, I have removed the above sentence. --Osquar F (talk) 12:15, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]