Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Paloco, Eloisa Aparecida Carlesse

  • Google
  • 2
  • 6
  • 3

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (2/2 displayed)

  • 2021Effect of Protein-Based Treatment on Chemical Composition, Hardness and Bond Strength of Remineralized Enamel1citations
  • 2021Effect of Amelogenin Solution in the Microhardness of Remineralized Enamel and Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets2citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Guiraldo, Ricardo
2 / 7 shared
Berger, Sandrine
2 / 9 shared
Amâncio, Daniele Cristina
1 / 1 shared
Fernandes Giuliangeli, Débora
1 / 1 shared
Santos, Lucineide
1 / 1 shared
Monteiro, Julia
1 / 1 shared
Chart of publication period
2021

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Guiraldo, Ricardo
  • Berger, Sandrine
  • Amâncio, Daniele Cristina
  • Fernandes Giuliangeli, Débora
  • Santos, Lucineide
  • Monteiro, Julia
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Effect of Amelogenin Solution in the Microhardness of Remineralized Enamel and Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets

  • Paloco, Eloisa Aparecida Carlesse
  • Fernandes Giuliangeli, Débora
  • Santos, Lucineide
  • Monteiro, Julia
  • Guiraldo, Ricardo
  • Berger, Sandrine
Abstract

<jats:p>Objectives. To evaluate the microhardness of tooth enamel remineralized with enamel matrix protein solution as well as the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded to this surface. Materials and Methods. In total, 24 human premolars were selected and divided into 3 experimental groups (n = 8): SE—sound enamel, DE—demineralized enamel, and TE—demineralized enamel treated with amelogenin solution. Samples from DE and TE groups were subjected to pH cycling to induce initial artificial caries lesion. TE group was treated with amelogenin solution. Samples were placed in artificial saliva for 7 days. Knoop microhardness was measured before any intervention (T0), after pH cycling (T1) and after amelogenin solution treatment application (T2). Twenty-four hours after ceramic orthodontic brackets were bonded, samples were subjected to shear test in a universal testing machine. Microhardness and shear measurement distributions were subjected to Kolmogorov–Smirnov normality test, which was followed by parametric tests (α = 0.05): 2-way analysis of variance (factors: enamel condition × treatment) and Tukey posttest for all three groups (SE, DE, and TE) in T0 and T2 for microhardness; analysis of variance and Tukey’s test, for shear bond strength test. Results. Means recorded for Knoop microhardness in T2, for the SE (366.7 KHN) and TE (342.8 KHN) groups, were significantly higher than those recorded for the DE group (263.5 KHN). The shear bond strength of the SE (15.44 MPa) and TE (14.84 MPa) groups statistically differed from that of the DE group (11.95 MPa). Conclusion. In vitro demineralized enamel treatment with amelogenin solution was capable of taking samples’ hardness back to levels similar to those observed for sound enamel. The shear bond strength on the enamel subjected to this treatment was similar to that observed for healthy enamel and higher than that observed for demineralized enamel.</jats:p>

Topics
  • surface
  • strength
  • shear test
  • hardness
  • ceramic