Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19851883›Full record

ReviewPhotosynthesis research

Optical microscopy in photosynthesis.

Richard Cisek, Leigh Spencer, Nicole Prent, Donatas Zigmantas, George S Espie, Virginijus Barzda

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Photosynthesis research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Richard CisekDepartment of Chemical and Physical Sciences, University of Toronto, 3359 Mississauga Road, Mississauga, ON, L5L 1C6, Canada.
Leigh Spencer
Nicole Prent
Donatas Zigmantas
George S Espie
Virginijus Barzda

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Emerging as well as the most frequently used optical microscopy techniques are reviewed and image contrast generation methods in a microscope are presented, focusing on the nonlinear contrasts such as harmonic generation and multiphoton excitation fluorescence. Nonlinear microscopy presents numerous advantages over linear microscopy techniques including improved deep tissue imaging, optical sectioning, and imaging of live unstained samples. Nonetheless, with the exception of multiphoton excitation fluorescence, nonlinear microscopy is in its infancy, lacking protocols, users and applications; hence, this review focuses on the potential of nonlinear microscopy for studying photosynthetic organisms. Examples of nonlinear microscopic imaging are presented including isolated light-harvesting antenna complexes from higher plants, starch granules, chloroplasts, unicellular alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, and cyanobacteria Leptolyngbya sp. and Anabaena sp. While focusing on nonlinear microscopy techniques, second and third harmonic generation and multiphoton excitation fluorescence microscopy, other emerging nonlinear imaging modalities are described and several linear optical microscopy techniques are reviewed in order to clearly describe their capabilities and to highlight the advantages of nonlinear microscopy.

Indexed as

MicroscopyNonlinear DynamicsOptical PhenomenaPhotosynthesis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.