ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2020
Spontaneous loss versus stimulation gain in pump-probe microscopy: a proof of concept demonstration.
Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
significanceThe large background, narrow dynamic range, and detector saturation have been the common limiting factors in stimulated emission (SE)-based pump-probe microscopy, attributed to the very small signal overriding the very intense laser probe beam. To better differentiate the signal of interest from the background, lock-in detection is used to measure the fluorescence quenching, which is termed spontaneous loss (SL). The advantages are manifold. The spontaneous fluorescence signal can be well separated from both the pump and the probe beams with filters, thus eliminating the background, enlarging the dynamic range, and avoiding the saturation of the detector.
aimWe propose and demonstrate an integrated pump-probe microscopy technique based on lock-in detection for background removal and dynamic range enhancement through SL detection. APPROACH: The experimental setup is configured with a pulsed diode laser at a wavelength λpu = 635 nm, acting as a pump (excitation) and a mode-locked Ti:sapphire laser at a central wavelength λpr = 780 nm, serving as the probe beam (stimulation). Both pulse trains are temporally synchronized through high precision delay control by adjusting the length of the triggering cables. The pump and probe beams are alternatively modulated at different frequencies f1 and f2 to extract the stimulated gain (SG) and SL signal.
resultsSG signal shows saturation due to the irradiation of the intense probe beam onto the photodetector. However, the detector saturation does not occur at high probe beam power for SL detection. The fluorescence lifetime images are acquired with reduced background. The theoretical signal-to-noise ratios for SG and SL are also estimated by photon statistics.
conclusionWe have confirmed that the detection of SL allows the elimination of the large background without photodetector saturation, which commonly exists in SG configuration. This modality would allow unprecedented manipulation and investigation of fluorophores in fluorescence imaging.
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.