ArticleThe Review of scientific instruments2013
Tuning donut profile for spatial resolution in stimulated emission depletion microscopy.
Article in The Review of scientific instruments, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Creating and moving nanoantenna cold spots anywhere.Light, science & applications · 2022Article
- A Fiber-Coupled Stimulated Emission Depletion Microscope for Bend-Insensitive Through-Fiber Imaging.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- A simple empirical algorithm for optimising depletion power and resolution for dye and system specific STED imaging.Journal of microscopy · 2019Article
- Identifying DNA methylation in a nanochannel.Science and technology of advanced materials · 2016Article
- Unimolecular Submersible Nanomachines. Synthesis, Actuation, and Monitoring.Nano letters · 2015Article
- Continuous-Wave Stimulated Emission Depletion Microscope for Imaging Actin Cytoskeleton in Fixed and Live Cells.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2015Article
- Axial Optical Traps: A New Direction for Optical Tweezers.Biophysical journal · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In stimulated emission depletion (STED)-based or up-conversion depletion-based super-resolution optical microscopy, the donut-shaped depletion beam profile is of critical importance to its resolution. In this study, we investigate the transformation of the donut-shaped depletion beam focused by a high numerical aperture (NA) microscope objective, and model STED point spread function (PSF) as a function of donut beam profile. We show experimentally that the intensity profile of the dark kernel of the donut can be approximated as a parabolic function, whose slope is determined by the donut beam size before the objective back aperture, or the effective NA. Based on this, we derive the mathematical expression for continuous wave (CW) STED PSF as a function of focal plane donut and excitation beam profiles, as well as dye properties. We find that the effective NA and the residual intensity at the center are critical factors for STED imaging quality and the resolution. The effective NA is critical for STED resolution in that it not only determines the donut shape but also the area the depletion laser power is dispersed. An improperly expanded depletion beam will have negligible improvement in resolution. The polarization of the depletion beam also plays an important role as it affects the residual intensity in the center of the donut. Finally, we construct a CW STED microscope operating at 488 nm excitation and 592 nm depletion with a resolution of 70 nm. Our study provides detailed insight to the property of donut beam, and parameters that are important for the optimal performance of STED microscopes. This paper will provide a useful guide for the construction and future development of STED microscopes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.