Literature DB >> 25802488

A Quantitative Measure of Field Illumination.

Claire M Brown1, Andrew Reilly1, Richard W Cole1.   

Abstract

In this paper, we describe a statistically based algorithm to quantify the uniformity of illumination in an optical light microscopy imaging system that outputs a single quality factor (QF) score. The importance of homogeneous field illumination in quantitative light microscopy is well understood and often checked. However, there is currently no standard automatic quantitative measure of the uniformity of the field illumination. Images from 89 different laser-scanning confocal microscopes (LSCMs), which were collected as part of an international study on microscope quality assessment, were used as a "training" set to build the algorithm. To validate the algorithm and verify its robustness, images from 33 additional microscopes, including LSCM and wide-field (WF) microscopes, were used. The statistical paradigm used for developing the quality scoring scale was a regression approach to supervised learning. Three intensity profiles across each image-2 corner-to-corner diagonals and a center horizontal-were used to generate pixel-intensity data. All of the lines passed through the center of the image. The intensity profile data then were converted into a single-field illumination QF score in the range of 0-100, with 0 having extreme variation, and therefore, essentially unusable, and 100 having no deviation, i.e., straight lines with a constant uniform intensity. Empirically, a QF ≥ 83 was determined to be the minimum acceptable value based on manufacturer acceptance tests and reasonably achievable values. This new QF is an invaluable metric to ascertain objectively and easily the uniformity of illumination quality, provide a traceable reference for monitoring field uniformity over time, and make a direct comparison among different microscopes. The QF can also be used as an indicator of system failure and the need for alignment or service of the instrument.

Entities:  

Keywords:  alignment; flat field; imaging; quality assessment; supervised learning

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25802488      PMCID: PMC4365985          DOI: 10.7171/jbt.15-2602-001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomol Tech        ISSN: 1524-0215


  6 in total

1.  Practical confocal microscopy and the evaluation of system performance.

Authors:  R M Zucker; O T Price
Journal:  Methods       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 3.608

2.  Concentrated dyes as a source of two-dimensional fluorescent field for characterization of a confocal microscope.

Authors:  M A Model; J L Blank
Journal:  J Microsc       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 1.758

3.  Quality assurance testing for modern optical imaging systems.

Authors:  Robert F Stack; Carol J Bayles; Anne-Marie Girard; Karen Martin; Cynthia Opansky; Katherine Schulz; Richard W Cole
Journal:  Microsc Microanal       Date:  2011-04-11       Impact factor: 4.127

4.  Recommendations for fluorescence instrument qualification: the new ASTM Standard Guide.

Authors:  Paul C DeRose; Ute Resch-Genger
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 6.986

5.  Method of calibration of a fluorescence microscope for quantitative studies.

Authors:  Katarzyna M Kedziora; Johen H M Prehn; Jurek Dobrucki; Tytus Bernas
Journal:  J Microsc       Date:  2011-07-14       Impact factor: 1.758

6.  Evaluating performance in three-dimensional fluorescence microscopy.

Authors:  John M Murray; Paul L Appleton; Jason R Swedlow; Jennifer C Waters
Journal:  J Microsc       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 1.758

  6 in total
  4 in total

Review 1.  A Review of the Scientific Rigor, Reproducibility, and Transparency Studies Conducted by the ABRF Research Groups.

Authors:  Sheenah M Mische; Nancy C Fisher; Susan M Meyn; Katia Sol-Church; Rebecca L Hegstad-Davies; Frances Weis-Garcia; Marie Adams; John M Ashton; Kym M Delventhal; Julie A Dragon; Laura Holmes; Pratik Jagtap; Kristopher E Kubow; Christopher E Mason; Magnus Palmblad; Brian C Searle; Christoph W Turck; Kevin L Knudtson
Journal:  J Biomol Tech       Date:  2020-04

2.  Quality assessment in light microscopy for routine use through simple tools and robust metrics.

Authors:  Orestis Faklaris; Leslie Bancel-Vallée; Aurélien Dauphin; Baptiste Monterroso; Perrine Frère; David Geny; Tudor Manoliu; Sylvain de Rossi; Fabrice P Cordelières; Damien Schapman; Roland Nitschke; Julien Cau; Thomas Guilbert
Journal:  J Cell Biol       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 8.077

3.  An automated Bayesian pipeline for rapid analysis of single-molecule binding data.

Authors:  Carlas S Smith; Karina Jouravleva; Maximiliaan Huisman; Samson M Jolly; Phillip D Zamore; David Grunwald
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-01-17       Impact factor: 14.919

4.  Using the NoiSee workflow to measure signal-to-noise ratios of confocal microscopes.

Authors:  Alexia Ferrand; Kai D Schleicher; Nikolaus Ehrenfeuchter; Wolf Heusermann; Oliver Biehlmaier
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.