Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37959890›Full record

ArticlePolymers2023

Analysing Sources of Error in Total Internal Reflection Microscopy (TIRM) Experiments and Data Analysis.

J Alejandro Rivera-Morán, Peter R Lang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polymers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

J Alejandro Rivera-MoránForschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, IBI-4, 52425 Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2950-1402
Peter R LangForschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, IBI-4, 52425 Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8914-7193

Funding

European Union's Horizon 2020 731019
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many phenomena observed in synthetic and biological colloidal suspensions are dominated by the static interaction energies and the hydrodynamic interactions that act both between individual particles and also between colloids and macroscopic interfaces. This calls for methods that allow precise measurements of the corresponding forces. One method used for this purpose is total internal reflection microscopy (TIRM), which has been employed for around three decades to measure in particular the interactions between a single particle suspended in a liquid and a solid surface. However, given the importance of the observable variables, it is crucial to understand the possibilities and limitations of the method. In this paper, we investigate the influence of technically unavoidable noise effects and an inappropriate choice of particle size and sampling time on TIRM measurement results. Our main focus is on the measurement of diffusion coefficients and drift velocities, as the influence of error sources on dynamic properties has not been investigated so far. We find that detector shot noise and prolonged sampling times may cause erroneous results in the steep parts of the interaction potential where forces of the order of pico-Newtons or larger act on the particle, while the effect of background noise is negligible below certain thresholds. Furthermore, noise does not significantly affect dynamic data but we find that lengthy sampling times and/or probe particles with too small a radius will cause issues. Most importantly, we observe that dynamic results are very likely to differ from the standard hydrodynamic predictions for stick boundary conditions due to partial slip.

Indexed as

Brownian dynamicscolloidal interactionhydrodynamic interactiontotal internal reflection microscopy (TIRM)

Identifiers

PMID37959890
PMCPMC10647835

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.