ArticleUltramicroscopy2018
Relative merits and limiting factors for x-ray and electron microscopy of thick, hydrated organic materials.
Article in Ultramicroscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed.
- X-ray fluorescence microscopy exposure estimates using a single excitation energy.Journal of synchrotron radiation · 2026Article
- Damage-limited resolution for X-ray and electron microscopy of organic specimens.Acta crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology · 2026Article
- Electrons and X-rays for diffraction and imaging.Acta crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology · 2026Review
- X-ray fluorescence microscopy exposure estimates using a single excitation energy.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- 50th anniversary of the Stanford SSRL synchrotron radiation and protein crystallography initiative.Journal of synchrotron radiation · 2026Article
- Nondestructive X-ray tomography of brain tissue ultrastructure.Nature methods · 2025Article
- Contrast by electron microscopy in thick biological specimens.Journal of microscopy · 2025Article
- Simulation Study of High-Precision Characterization of MeV Electron Interactions for Advanced Nano-Imaging of Thick Biological Samples and Microchips.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Optimize Electron Beam Energy toward In Situ Imaging of Thick Frozen Bio-Samples with Nanometer Resolution Using MeV-STEM.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Computational models of amorphous ice for accurate simulation of cryo-EM images of biological samples.Ultramicroscopy · 2024Article
- Multivariate hyperspectral data analytics across length scales to probe compositional, phase, and strain heterogeneities in electrode materials.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Article
- Functional and multiscale 3D structural investigation of brain tissue through correlative in vivo physiology, synchrotron microtomography and volume electron microscopy.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Exploring spectroscopic X-ray nano-imaging with Zernike phase contrast enhancement.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Sample Preparation and Warping Accuracy for Correlative Multimodal Imaging in the Mouse Olfactory Bulb Using 2-Photon, Synchrotron X-Ray and Volume Electron Microscopy.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Article
- Cryo-TEM simulations of amorphous radiation-sensitive samples using multislice wave propagation.IUCrJ · 2021Article
- Using a modified double deep image prior for crosstalk mitigation in multislice ptychography.Journal of synchrotron radiation · 2021Article
- Combining X-rays, neutrons and electrons, and NMR, for precision and accuracy in structure-function studies.Acta crystallographica. Section A, Foundations and advances · 2021Article
- Upscaling X-ray nanoimaging to macroscopic specimens.Journal of applied crystallography · 2021Review
- Dense neuronal reconstruction through X-ray holographic nano-tomography.Nature neuroscience · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Electron and x-ray microscopes allow one to image the entire, unlabeled structure of hydrated materials at a resolution well beyond what visible light microscopes can achieve. However, both approaches involve ionizing radiation, so that radiation damage must be considered as one of the limits to imaging. Drawing upon earlier work, we describe here a unified approach to estimating the image contrast (and thus the required exposure and corresponding radiation dose) in both x-ray and electron microscopy. This approach accounts for factors such as plural and inelastic scattering, and (in electron microscopy) the use of energy filters to obtain so-called "zero loss" images. As expected, it shows that electron microscopy offers lower dose for specimens thinner than about 1 µm (such as for studies of macromolecules, viruses, bacteria and archaebacteria, and thin sectioned material), while x-ray microscopy offers superior characteristics for imaging thicker specimen such as whole eukaryotic cells, thick-sectioned tissues, and organs. The required radiation dose scales strongly as a function of the desired spatial resolution, allowing one to understand the limits of live and frozen hydrated specimen imaging. Finally, we consider the factors limiting x-ray microscopy of thicker materials, suggesting that specimens as thick as a whole mouse brain can be imaged with x-ray microscopes without significant image degradation should appropriate image reconstruction methods be identified.
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.