ArticleNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Optimize Electron Beam Energy toward In Situ Imaging of Thick Frozen Bio-Samples with Nanometer Resolution Using MeV-STEM.
Article in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mesoscopic Quantum Effect: The Interaction of Electron Phenomena at the Mesoscopic Scale.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To optimize electron energy for in situ imaging of large biological samples up to 10 μm in thickness with nanoscale resolutions, we implemented an analytical model based on elastic and inelastic characteristic angles. This model has been benchmarked by Monte Carlo simulations and can be used to predict the transverse beam size broadening as a function of electron energy while the probe beam traverses through the sample. As a result, the optimal choice of the electron beam energy can be realized. In addition, the impact of the dose-limited resolution was analysed. While the sample thickness is less than 10 μm, there exists an optimal electron beam energy below 10 MeV regarding a specific sample thickness. However, for samples thicker than 10 μm, the optimal beam energy is 10 MeV or higher depending on the sample thickness, and the ultimate resolution could become worse with the increase in the sample thickness. Moreover, a MeV-STEM column based on a two-stage lens system can be applied to reduce the beam size from one micron at aperture to one nanometre at the sample with the energy tuning range from 3 to 10 MeV. In conjunction with the state-of-the-art ultralow emittance electron source that we recently implemented, the maximum size of an electron beam when it traverses through an up to 10 μm thick bio-sample can be kept less than 10 nm. This is a critical step toward the in situ imaging of large, thick biological samples with nanometer resolution.
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.