Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 2017 44; 6572
Application of a barometer for assessment of oral functions:
Donders space
K. HIRAKI*, Y. YAMADA, M. KUROSE, W. OFUSA, T. SUGIYAMA* &
R . I S H I D A * *Department of Oral Health and Clinical Science Division of Dysphagia Rehabilitation, Tokyo Dental College, Tokyo,
Oral Health Science Center, Tokyo Dental College, Tokyo, Division of Oral Physiology, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and
Dental Sciences, Niigata, Department of Geriatric Dentistry, Tsurumi University School of Dental Medicine, Yokohama, and Department
of Physiology, Tokyo Dental College, Tokyo, Japan
SUMMARY We developed a barometer applicable to a
small space, to assess oral and pharyngeal functions.
Negative oral pressure during rest and pressure
changes during swallowing were measured in a
space between the palate and tongue (STP). Twenty
volunteers were asked to sit in a chair in a relaxed
upright position. A sensor was placed on the
posterior midline of hard palate. Recording
commenced just before subjects closed their lips
and continued. Subjects were asked to swallow
saliva and keep the apposition. Finally, subjects
were asked to open their mouth. Recordings were
performed five times, and 5 s of continuous data in
each phase was averaged. To verify the reliability of
the system, the same procedure was accomplished
with twin sensors. When the jaw and lips were
closed, the pressure slightly decreased from
atmospheric pressure ( 0
17  0
24-kPa). After
Introduction
Pre-gastric food processing begins with food intake
and ends with deglutition. Five stages comprise the
process: recognition stage, masticatory stage, oral
stage, pharyngeal stage and oesophageal stage (1, 2).
The tongue is quite important for the sequence (3, 4).
At the time of food intake, the food is received by the
tongue from the hand or tableware. Thereafter, the
tongue mixes the food with saliva, classifies the food
by its size and transports the food bolus backwards for
swallowing, in collaboration with other oral organs
2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
swallowing, the pressure in STP showed more
negative value ( 0
50  0
59-kPa). There is a
significant difference between the values in open
condition and after swallowing (P < 0
001) and
between values after swallowing and final open
condition (P < 0
05). Twin sensor showed almost the
same trajectories of pressure changes for all the
recordings. Obtained negative pressure might
generate about 0
71-N of force and would be enough
to keep the tongue in the palatal fossa at rest. The
system detected large negative/positive pressure
changes during swallowing. We conclude this
system may be a tool to evaluate oral functions.
KEYWORDS: barometric pressure, swallowing, jaw
position, velopharyngeal insufficiency, Donders space
Accepted for publication 6 November 2016
(5, 6). To accomplish these functions, the oral cavity
is constructed with hard and soft parts and is divided
into small spaces (7).
One other function of the tongue is maintaining
the mandibular rest position (810). The lips are
closed at the physiological rest position, but the upper
and lower jaws maintain a stable position with a gap
of several millimetres called free-way space. Tension
of the closing muscles, elasticity of the connecting tis-
sues between the upper and lower jaws (11, 12), head
posture (13) and negative pressure generated in a
space described by Donders (10) are candidate factors
doi: 10.1111/joor.12456
66 K . H I R A K I et al.
to determine the position. The tip of the tongue
touches the incisive papilla or lingual surface of the
maxillary incisor and acts as an anchor for the tongue
posture. More than one hundred years ago, Donders
claimed that there was a space in the upper part of
the dorsum of the tongue when the mandible is at
rest (10). Recently, Bourdiol et al. (8) successfully
evaluated the volume of the space (in-mouth air cav-
ity) at rest as nominally 12-mL with a range of 10
18 mL.
Donders described the mechanism of negative pres-
sure in a space built between tongue and palate while
the jaw was at rest (10). The pressure was measured
using a manometer and flexible tube. He reported 2
4 mmHg of negative pressure in the space and specu-
lated that the space might be surrounded by the root
of tongue and hard palate. As the pressure was small
in value, he estimated the space might be small in
volume. The space might be completely closed at the
anterior part of oral cavity with tongue and hard
palate. The phenomenon might be emphasised by
changing the tongue shape flat and then bending the
tongue tip backwards. Finally, he considered that the
jaw at rest was supported by the negative pressure
generated in the small space (10). In this study, we
call the space STP (a space formed between the dor-
sum of tongue and the palate).
Faigenblum explored the pressure in STP with a
manometer for four subjects. He reported
9
7  0
5 mmHg of negative pressure on average after
swallowing (14). He then calculated a possible force
of about 300-g from the value of negative pressure
and the area of the palate. The negative pressure was
definite after a swallow with larger changes (positive
and negative) in pressure; however, the change dur-
ing swallowing was rather small in amplitude and had
a short duration compared with those of recent
reports (3, 7).
Pressure in the oral cavity has been measured by
many studies (3, 7, 1416); however, most of the
methods employed were conventional in that the
pressure in a space was measured with a tube con-
nected to a sensor placed outside of the oral cavity.
Inconveniently, the tube may resist air flow during
measurement, and thus, the response resolution
may be low. In this respect, Woda et al. (17) sug-
gested in their review that the nature of the space
might need to be confirmed in a modern scientific
context.
Recent technology has produced a factory calibrated
absolute pressure sensor small enough to fit into a
very low volume, have enough resolution both in
time and in pressure measurement and equipped with
a compensation circuit for temperature. The aim of
this study was to evaluate this barometer as a tool for
oral pressure and to measure the pressure in STP at
rest.
Methods
Barometer
We have developed a barometer to assess oral and
pharyngeal functions that can measure atmospheric
pressure in a small space with a 3-ms sampling inter-
val. The system consists of a sensor (Freescale Semi-
conductor: MPL115A1), flexible cables, a
microprocessor to control the sensor and a PC for data
collection. The absolute pressure sensor is
1
5 9 3 9 5 mm in size and provides accurate pres-
sure measurements from 50 to 115-kPa. An integrated
analog-to-digital converter (10-bits resolution) con-
verts pressure and temperature sensor readings to
digitised outputs via a serial peripheral interface (SPI)
port. Factory calibration data are stored internally in
an on-board Read Only Memory. Utilising the raw
sensor output and calibration data, the host micropro-
cessor executes a compensation algorithm to render
compensated absolute pressure with 1-kPa of accuracy
and 0
15-kPa of resolution. The microprocessor can
handle up to three sensors simultaneously.
Two types of sensor were fabricated: a single type
and a twin type. The single type consists of one sensor
as seen in Fig. 1a. The twin type is composed of two
sensors, arranged side by side in point symmetry so
that the distance between sensing windows is 4 mm
as seen in Fig. 1b.
Subjects
Twenty young volunteers (aged 2636 years) were
recruited from the postgraduate student body at
Tokyo Dental College. This study was conducted with
the approval of the Ethics Committee of the Tokyo
Dental College (approval number: 659). Subjects were
asked to sit in a chair in a relaxed upright position
without head support. Measurements were taken in a
space between the tongue dorsum and posterior hard
2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
 PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS IN ORAL CAVITY
(a)
(b)
Fig. 1. (a) An absolute pressure sensor with thin wires. The
sensor is 1
5 9 3 9 5 mm with a 1-mm-diameter hole in the
metal case. (b) A twin sensor. Twin type is composed of two
sensors arranged side by side so that the distance between sens-
ing holes is 4 mm.
palate (Fig. 2a) to test for the negative pressure
described by Donders (10). Sensor was placed on the
posterior midline of the hard palate using an adhesive
material for dentures (Denture adhesives Correct:* )
to measure pressure change (Fig. 2b).
Experimental protocols
Our recording procedure followed that of Faigen-
blums study (14). Recordings started with calibration
signals. Then, the control pressure, that is atmospheric
*SIONOGI Co., LTD, Osaka, Japan
2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
67
pressure, was recorded for about 15 s while the sub-
jects opened their mouth (period indicated by phase-
1 in Fig. 3). After instruction, the subject closed their
jaw and lips and then a 15-s recording (period indi-
cated by phase-2) was made. The subjects were then
asked to swallow saliva and to keep the apposition for
15 s (period indicated by phase-3) for recording.
Finally, the subjects were asked to open their mouth
and the atmospheric pressure was again recorded for
15 s (period indicated by phase-4). The recording
was ended with calibration signals. Recordings were
performed five times over the four phases for all sub-
jects. For further analyses, 5 s of continuous data was
selected from the middle of 15 s of recording in each
phase was averaged.
Experiment 1. All the subjects participated in this ses-
sion. The single type of sensor was placed on the pos-
terior midline of the hard palate. As the dental
adhesive material gradually dissolved in saliva, some
of the recordings were affected by the influx of the
adhesive onto the sensor. This caused the pressure
readings to be increased or decreased. We thus
excluded recordings in which pressure measured in
phase-4 was low or high comparing with that in
phase-1, as values in phase-1 and phase-4 should be
equal if no influx occurred. Also, all other unstable
recordings were excluded. A total of fourteen record-
ings were advanced for further analyses to evaluate
the pressure change in STP.
Experiment 2. In this experiment, the reliability of
measurement system was evaluated, to determine
whether there was a difference in pressure in a small
space surrounded by soft tissue or not. The pressure
change in a small space was measured with the twin
sensor. Because the twin sensor was technically diffi-
cult to make, the number of subjects was limited.
Eight subjects were measured with the twin sensor.
Analyses
For statistical analyses, pressure waveform (5 s) just
prior to each task was selected as typical pressure
change of each phase. The average value of the wave
(kilopascal, kPa) was analysed. Effect of jaw position
and tasks on pressure was analysed statistically with
Friedman test and post hoc comparisons (Dunns test)
as necessary. T-test was used for comparison of
68 K . H I R A K I et al.

(a) (b)

Fig. 2. (a) An illustration of the

measured space (STP). Filled arrow
indicates the STP region. (b)
Experimental set-up. A pressure
sensor was placed on the posterior
midline of the hard palate using an
adhesive material for dentures.

Lips Lips Lips

open close open

Phase-1 Phase-2 Phase-3 Phase-4

20 kPa

Swallow
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 (s)

Fig. 3. An example of pressure recording measured in STP. Calibration signals were added into the waveform at start and end of
recordings (filled arrow head: 90 and 110 kPa). Ordinate axis represents pressure changes in kPa. One recording is composed of four
recording phases (15 s each). Dashed line indicates the time point of postural change of lips. Dotted line indicates onset and offset of
saliva swallowing task.

pressure value between outputs from twin sensors. To (kPa)

show the analogous outputs of the twin sensor, the 05
*** *
correlation coefficient was calculated: one sensor out- 0
put is set on X-axis and the other sensor output is set
on Y-axis. The data were expressed as average  s.d. 10
P < 0
05 was considered statistically significant.
20
Results 25
Phase-1 Phase-2 Phase-3 Phase-4

Experiment 1
Figure 3 shows a typical recording of pressure change
in STP. When the mouth is open (phase-1), pressure
should be equivalent to that of the atmosphere.
Therefore, the reference pressure was set at phase-1.
The pressure value slightly decreased accompanying
with jaw and lips closing (phase-2: 0
17  0
24-
kPa). These negative pressures in phase-2 did not
show significant differences between those in phase-1
(Fig. 4, P > 0
05). When subjects swallowed saliva,
large pressure changes were observed in a short
Fig. 4. Effect of lip position and swallow task on averaged pres-
sure. Pressure changes in STP divided into four phases: lips open
(phase-1), lips closed (phase-2), lips closed after swallowing
(phase-3) and final lips open (phase-4). ***P < 0
001 *P < 0
05.
interval (Fig. 3). A typical swallowing event was char-
acterised by a negative pressure followed by a positive
pressure. Many of the pressure peaks were more than
15-kPa. After swallowing (phase-3), the pressure
value changed to more negative direction compared
to phase-2. The average pressure in phase-3 was

2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

 PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS IN ORAL CAVITY 69

0
50  0
59-kPa. When the subject was instructed Discussion

to open his/her lips (phase-4), the pressure value
returned to atmospheric pressure (P > 0
05, compared Methodological consideration
to phase-1).
There are two methods available to measure pressure
Jaw position and swallowing task produced a signif-
in the small spaces of an oral cavity. One is an indi-
icant change in pressure value (Fig. 4, P < 0
001
rect method combining a tube and a pressure-measur-
Friedman test). Multiple group comparisons (Dunns
ing device. For the indirect method, one end of the
test) revealed a significant decrease in pressure value
tube is placed in a target space and the other end is
in phase-3 when compared to phase-1 and phase-4
connected to an extraoral pressure-measuring device
(P < 0
001, P < 0
05, respectively). As described in
that is either a manometer or an electrical sensor. The
Methods, in six of the twenty recordings, sensor error
other method is direct measurement, where a small
was suspected due to adhesive influx, in that values
pressure sensor is set in the target space. To measure
in phase-4 did not return to atmospheric pressure
the pressure change in an oral cavity, it is necessary
(within the resolution of sensor). Therefore, data from
to consider four important properties. These are accu-
these six recordings were excluded from the analyses.
racy, resolution, temperature stability and compatibil-
ity with the surroundings such as soft tissue, saliva
Experiment 2 and food.
It is important to rule out the possibility of error in
pressure measurements that could be caused by soft Table 1. Correlation coefficients obtained from sensor outputs
tissue interference with the sensing port. To validate of twin sensor
our pressure measurements, twin sensors were tested
Subject 1 0
8930
952
with eight subjects. As shown in Fig. 5, twin sensor
Subject 2 0
7450
952
showed nearly identical trajectories of pressure Subject 3 0
6960
976
change for the duration of the recordings. To show Subject 4 0
7850
954
the similarity of recordings from twin sensors, the cor- Subject 5 0
7100
893
relation coefficient was calculated. As a result, the Subject 6 0
5040
786
Subject 7 0
0650
620
correlation coefficients obtained from eight recordings
Subject 8 0
4060
572
are high (Table 1).

Lips Lips Lips

open close open

Sensor-1 20 kPa

Phase-1 Phase-2 Phase-3 Phase-4

Sensor-2 20 kPa

Swallow

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 (s)

Fig. 5. An example of pressure recording in STP with twin sensor. Recordings were carried out with two sensors (upper and lower
traces) simultaneously. Calibration signals were added into the waveform at start and end of recordings (filled arrow head: 90 and
110 kPa). Ordinate axis represents pressure changes in kPa. One recording is composed of four recording phases (15 s each). Dashed
line indicates the time point of postural change of lips. Dotted line indicates onset and offset of saliva swallowing task.

2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

70 K . H I R A K I et al.
Using indirect methods, pressure changes may be
transmitted by the movement of air/liquid in the
tube. As the tube is soft and thin, it acts as a capacitor
and a resistor for the measurement system, dampen-
ing high-frequency components in the pressure
changes. Therefore, large positive pressure changes
occurring in a short time may not be detected by the
system. In fact, Faigenblum (14) could not record
large negative and positive pressure changes in the
short time associated with swallowing as seen in our
results (Figs 3 and 5). One other concern with the
indirect method is a rectifying function of the tube.
This will be discussed later.
Although the sensor we employed in this experi-
ment has excellent characteristics for pressure mea-
surements in an oral cavity, its drawback is that it
is likely to be affected by mechanical disturbance
such as by food. The sensor is enclosed in a small
case, and pressure changes reach the sensing ele-
ment through a small hole (1 mm in diameter) in
the case. When adhesive substance contacts the
sensing element, the measurements may be dis-
torted. Saliva, which has a slight adhesive character,
may have a minor effect on the sensor. Adhesives
used to fix the sensor on palatal mucosa may dis-
solve in saliva and thus the sensor output may be
distorted. This problem can be eliminated easily by
covering the sensor with thin rubber. The larger
pressure changes during mastication and swallowing
can be accurately measured by our system. How-
ever, in this experiment we did not use the rubber
cover, as the pressure change in STP is so small that
even thin rubber may affect the measurements. For-
tunately, this error can be recognised when the
value of phase-4 is far from that of phase-1. We
excluded data when difference in values of phase-1
and phase-4 exceeded 0
15-kPa (the resolution of
the sensor) even though the incidence was limited.
We concluded that the sensor employed in this
study could effectively measure the small pressure
changes in STP during the jaw at rest.
Verification of the Donders report
As shown in Fig. 4, we obtained statistically signifi-
cant negative pressures in STP when the jaw is at
rest. Just after the jaw and lips were closed (phase-
2), the pressure slightly decreased 0
17  0
24-kPa
from the reference (phase-1). After swallowing
saliva (i.e. phase-3), the average negative pressure
was measured as 0
50  0
59-kPa. The negative
value might be enhanced by the tongue reposition-
ing during swallowing. The negative value was simi-
lar to that described by Donders (10), that is 2
4 mmHg (=0
270
53 kPa). In 2011, Engelke et al.
reported negative pressure of about 8
2 kPa in the
space equivalent to STP of this study when the jaw
is at rest (7). They employed the method with a
tube and electrical sensor. The negative pressure
during rest is stable for a while, and thus, pressure
in the space and the manometer may reach equilib-
rium. As a result, the signal dampening properties
of the tube did not disturb the measurement even
with the indirect method.
Donders theorised that the jaw at rest was supported
by the negative pressure generated in the space (10).
Faigenblum confirmed the negative pressure of
9
7 mmHg (= 1
29 kPa) and estimated the negative
pressure acting over the area of the subjects hard
palate would be capable of exerting forces ranging
between 100 and 350-g (14). The force can be calcu-
lated with the negative pressure and the area of palate.
We did not measure the area of palate; however, we
have found literature in which the average palate area
in the Asian population is reported as 14
2 cm2 (18).
Therefore, 0
50-kPa of negative pressure might gener-
ate about 0
71-N (=71 gf) of force to support the tongue
while the jaw is at rest. This would be enough to keep
the tongue in the palatal fossa.
Pressure changes during swallowing
We did not measure pressure changes during swal-
lowing as it was not a focus of this experiment. We
did, however, observe gross negative/positive pressure
changes during saliva swallowing. Engelke et al. and
Santander et al. (7, 16) reported only negative pres-
sure during swallowing. We agree that negative pres-
sure could be generated in the space during
swallowing (as seen in Figs 3 and 5). However, we
cannot explain why they could not record positive
pressure. As swallowing starts with propelling of food
by the tongue (19), there must be positive pressure
between the tongue and palate. Kieser et al. (3) mea-
sured pressure changes at the palatal vault (anterior
and posterior) during swallowing. They recorded not
only a large positive pressure but also significant neg-
ative peak amplitude, before both rise to their
2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
 PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS IN ORAL CAVITY
maximum. These findings were confirmed in our
experiment and in other studies (20, 21).
Unlike Faigenblum (14), Engelke et al. (7) used a
modern system (semiconductor sensor) for pressure
measurement; however, a tube is used to connect
the space and the sensor outside of oral cavity. The
method with a tube has an advantage, avoiding the
influence of temperature change; however, for posi-
tive pressure, there may be miss-measurement. In
fact, Engelke et al. (7) stated that This observation
is basically contradictory to the findings of many
authors who observed positive pressures during
chewing, during swallowing and at rest. They also
made the point that any closed compartment with
elastic walls and an inwardly directed pressure gra-
dient may cause positive pressure on rigid structures
in its lumen, according to the principle of an elastic
vacuum chamber. We thus measured pressure
changes at two points using the twin sensor. As
seen in Fig. 5, the twin sensor revealed that the
outputs of two sensors (4 mm apart in distance)
were similar both in positive/negative pressure with
a slight time difference. The time difference may
reflect a pressure gradient generated in elastic
walls. Therefore, the sensor employed here can
record positive/negative pressure changes with high
resolution in a small space surrounded by soft
tissues.
Conclusions
We confirmed the negative pressure in STP while the
jaw is at rest. The negative value is similar to those
reported by others. The negative value would be
enough to keep the tongue in the palatal fossa during
rest. One other finding was short but large negative/
positive alternations in pressure during swallowing,
which may reflect tongue and soft palate movements
to propel food backward. Currently, bolus and struc-
ture movements during mastication and swallowing
could only be seen by videofluorography. Other meth-
ods such as pressure measurement with a load cell
placed between the tongue and palate have been tried;
however, the load cell could not measure negative
pressures. As pressure changes during eating would be
large, the weak point of this barometer could be
addressed by covering the sensor with thin rubber. We
thus conclude that a barometer may be one of the tools
to evaluate oral functions.
2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
71
Acknowledgments
We thank Patrick M Steusloff for language editing.
Funding for this study was provided by MEXT
KAKENHI Grant Number 26463181 (to Masayuki
Kurose), 15K11055 (to Yoshiaki Yamada) and
16K15808 (to Wataru Ofusa).
Disclosures
The authors have stated explicitly that there are no
competing financial and conflict of interests in con-
nection with this article.
References
1. Koc H, Vinyard CJ, Essick GK, Foegeding EA. Food oral pro-
cessing: conversion of food structure to textural perception.
Annu Rev Food Sci Technol. 2013;4:237266.
2. Leopold NA, Kagel MC. Swallowing, ingestion and dyspha-
gia: a reappraisal. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1983;64:371373.
3. Kieser J, Singh B, Swain M, Ichim I, Waddell JN, Kennedy
D et al. Measuring intraoral pressure: adaptation of a dental
appliance allows measurement during function. Dysphagia.
2008;23:237243.
4. Ono T, Hori K, Nokubi T. Pattern of tongue pressure on hard
palate during swallowing. Dysphagia. 2004;19:259264.
5. Okada A, Honma M, Nomura S, Yamada Y. Oral behavior
from food intake until terminal swallow. Physiol Behav.
2007;90:172179.
6. van der Bilt A, Engelen L, Pereira LJ, van der Glas HW,
Abbink JH. Oral physiology and mastication. Physiol Behav.
2006;89:2227.
7. Engelke W, Jung K, Knosel M. Intra-oral compartment pres-
sures: a biofunctional model and experimental measure-
ments under different conditions of posture. Clin Oral
Investig. 2011;15:165176.
8. Bourdiol P, Mishellany-Dutour A, Peyron MA, Woda A. Con-
tributory role of the tongue and mandible in modulating the in-
mouth air cavity at rest. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17:20252032.
9. Brill N, Tryde G. Physiology of mandibular positions. Front
Oral Physiol. 1974;1:199237.
10. Donders FC. Under den Mechanismus des Saugens. Pflugers
Arch. 1875;10:9194.
11. Miles TS. Postural control of the human mandible. Arch
Oral Biol. 2007;52:347352.
12. Miles TS, Flavel SC, Nordstrom MA. Stretch reflexes in the
human masticatory muscles: a brief review and a new func-
tional role. Hum Mov Sci. 2004;23:337349.
13. Tingey EM, Buschang PH, Throckmorton GS. Mandibular
rest position: a reliable position influenced by head support
and body posture. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.
2001;120:614622.
14. Faigenblum MJ. Negative oral pressures. A research report.
Dent Pract Dent Rec. 1966;16:214216.
72 K . H I R A K I et al.
15. Geddes DT, Kent JC, Mitoulas LR, Hartmann PE. Tongue
movement and intra-oral vacuum in breastfeeding infants.
Early Hum Dev. 2008;84:471477.
16. Santander P, Engelke W, Olthoff A, Volter C. Intraoral pres-
sure patterns during swallowing. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryn-
gol. 2013;270:10191025.
17. Woda A, Pionchon P, Palla S. Regulation of mandibular pos-
tures: mechanisms and clinical implications. Crit Rev Oral
Biol Med. 2001;12:166178.
18. Kaku S. Comparison of morphology of the tongue space
between dentulous and edentulous jaws. J Kyushu Dent
Soc. 1987;41:481493.
19. van den Engel-Hoek L, de Groot IJ, Esser E, Gorissen B,
Hendriks JC, de Swart BJ et al. Biomechanical events of
swallowing are determined more by bolus consistency than
by age or gender. Physiol Behav. 2012;106:285290.
20. Kennedy D, Kieser J, Bolter C, Swain M, Singh B, Waddell
JN. Tongue pressure patterns during water swallowing.
Dysphagia. 2010;25:1119.
21. Bolter C, Raniga N, Waddell JN, Kiesser J. Conservation of
intraoral pressure changes during swallowing. J Dent Sci.
2012;7:324329.
Correspondence: Yoshiaki Yamada, Oral Health Science Center,
Tokyo Dental College, 2-9-18 Misaki-cho Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 101-
0061, Japan.
E-mail: yoyamada@tdc.ac.jp
2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd