Conn.D is better than Tb.N, because Tb.N makes some assumptions about the underlying geometry which may or may not be correct. Tb.N was developed to estimate trabeculae in thin sections, where the 3D information was not directly available. If you have 3D data, use Conn.D from Connectivity which counts topological holes, which corresponds directly to the number of trabculae. But, be careful that you have eliminated noise from the surface of your bone image.
Otherwise, I believe Tb.N is a simple derived value with a formula that you can look up and calculate (I don't have it to hand).
Michael
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BoneJ Users and Developers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
bonej-users-and-dev...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to
bonej-users-a...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/bonej-users-and-developers.
> For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
--
Sent from my Jolla