OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: Andrew M. Weiner
  • Vol. 22, Iss. 10 — May. 19, 2014
  • pp: 12398–12409
« Show journal navigation

Fast, super resolution imaging via Bessel-beam stimulated emission depletion microscopy

P. Zhang, P. M. Goodwin, and J. H. Werner  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 22, Issue 10, pp. 12398-12409 (2014)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.22.012398


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (1569 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

A substantial advantage of stimulated emission depletion (STED) microscopy over other super-resolution methods is that images can be acquired in real-time without any post-processing. However imaging speed and photodamage are two major concerns for STED imaging of whole cells. Here we propose a new microscopy method we have termed Bessel-Beam STED (or BB-STED) that overcomes both of these limitations of conventional STED microscopy. In the proposed method, rather than exciting a single STED spot in the sample, an entire line of the sample is illuminated. This line-scanning technique dramatically increases the speed of STED. In addition, plane-illumination by scanning of the line across the focal plane of a detection objective limits the light to a thin layer of the sample and thus significantly reduces photobleaching and photodamage above and below the focal plane compared to epi-illumination. Using the organic dye Atto647N as an example, we calculated the STED power required to break the diffraction limit. The results presented here will be used to guide future experimental designs.

© 2014 Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

It is well known that a point-like object that is imaged in the far-field of a microscope appears as a blurred-circle (an Airy disk) due to diffraction of light through the objective lens with finite pupil diameter [1

1. E. Abbe, “Beiträge zur Theorie des Mikroskops und der mikroskopischen Wahrnehmung,” Arch. Mikrosk. Anatomie 9, 413–418 (1873).

]. The diameter of the Airy disk is inversely proportional to the numerical aperture (NA) of the objective lens, and is approximately 200-300 nm for visible light illumination when observed through a high-numerical aperture immersion objective. Structures with dimensions smaller than this diffraction limit are not resolvable under a classical optical microscope. For over a century, the diffraction limit has prevented the analysis of sub-wavelength structures by far-field optical methods. While near-field optical microscopy [2

2. D. W. Pohl and D. Courjon, Near Field Optics (Kluwer, 1993).

] can overcome the diffraction limit, this method is time and equipment intensive and only suited for examination of structures at surfaces. In contrast to near field microscopy, over the past 20 years, a number of far-field microcopy methods have emerged that are also capable of breaking the diffraction limit. These methods include stimulated emission depletion microscopy (STED) [3

3. S. W. Hell and J. Wichmann, “Breaking the diffraction resolution limit by stimulated emission: stimulated-emission-depletion fluorescence microscopy,” Opt. Lett. 19(11), 780–782 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], structured illumination microscopy (SIM) [4

4. M. G. Gustafsson, “Surpassing the lateral resolution limit by a factor of two using structured illumination microscopy,” J. Microsc. 198(2), 82–87 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], and single molecule localization methods such as photoactivation localization microscopy (PALM) [5

5. E. Betzig, G. H. Patterson, R. Sougrat, O. W. Lindwasser, S. Olenych, J. S. Bonifacino, M. W. Davidson, J. Lippincott-Schwartz, and H. F. Hess, “Imaging intracellular fluorescent proteins at nanometer resolution,” Science 313(5793), 1642–1645 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], fluorescence photo-activation localization microscopy (F-PALM) [6

6. S. T. Hess, T. P. K. Girirajan, and M. D. Mason, “Ultra-high resolution imaging by fluorescence photoactivation localization microscopy,” Biophys. J. 91(11), 4258–4272 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], or stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (STORM) [7

7. M. J. Rust, M. Bates, and X. Zhuang, “Sub-diffraction-limit imaging by stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (STORM),” Nat. Methods 3(10), 793–795 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].

In the single molecule based methods, photoactivatable or photoswitchable probes are employed that can be turned on and off by light (or other methods) such that fluorophores within a diffraction-limited area can be separated in time. The localization of these separated emitters by using Gaussian fitting [5

5. E. Betzig, G. H. Patterson, R. Sougrat, O. W. Lindwasser, S. Olenych, J. S. Bonifacino, M. W. Davidson, J. Lippincott-Schwartz, and H. F. Hess, “Imaging intracellular fluorescent proteins at nanometer resolution,” Science 313(5793), 1642–1645 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7

7. M. J. Rust, M. Bates, and X. Zhuang, “Sub-diffraction-limit imaging by stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (STORM),” Nat. Methods 3(10), 793–795 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] or maximum-likelihood estimator (MLE) [8

8. C. S. Smith, N. Joseph, B. Rieger, and K. A. Lidke, “Fast, single-molecule localization that achieves theoretically minimum uncertainty,” Nat. Methods 7(5), 373–375 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 9

9. S. Quirin, S. R. P. Pavani, and R. Piestun, “Optimal 3D single-molecule localization for superresolution microscopy with aberrations and engineered point spread functions,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109(3), 675–679 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] yields a precision of tens of nanometers to a few nanometers, depending on the number of photons detected from a fluorophore and the background present in the image. To construct a sub-diffraction image, the separation-localization cycle has to be repeated many times such that the positions of a large number fluorophore labels in the sample can be determined. This process generally takes several minutes, with major limits to the temporal resolution being the off-switching rate of the probes [10

10. B. Huang, H. Babcock, and X. Zhuang, “Breaking the diffraction barrier: super-resolution imaging of cells,” Cell 143(7), 1047–1058 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] as well as readout speed of the camera.

In contrast to single molecule based super resolution methods that use photo-switchable probes, SIM is a wide-field CCD-based imaging technique that employs a series of well-defined, spatially periodic (generally sinusoidal) structured illumination excitation patterns to encode high-resolution spatial information in the resulting fluorescence images [4

4. M. G. Gustafsson, “Surpassing the lateral resolution limit by a factor of two using structured illumination microscopy,” J. Microsc. 198(2), 82–87 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The fluorescence signal arising from the interaction of the sample’s high-frequency spatial components with the reference excitation pattern generates another high-frequency pattern with unknown spatial frequencies. When the known (reference) and unknown (sample) patterns are superimposed, they form an interference, or moire, fringe pattern of low-frequency bands that encode spatial information of the original high-frequency patterns. Because the spatial frequency of the reference pattern is known, the unknown high spatial frequencies of the sample can be computationally extracted by analyzing the low-frequency moire fringe pattern, resulting in lateral resolution enhancement by a factor of 2 over the classical diffraction limit in a single direction. To obtain isotropic XY resolution enhancement, the excitation pattern must be rotated relative to the sample, which means that several raw images must be acquired for a given image plane, reducing imaging speed. While manual rotation of a grating was originally used for this purpose, imaging speeds have been increased to 11 Hz using a spatial light modulator for live cell imaging [11

11. P. Kner, B. B. Chhun, E. R. Griffis, L. Winoto, and M. G. L. Gustafsson, “Super-resolution video microscopy of live cells by structured illumination,” Nat. Methods 6(5), 339–342 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].

In contrast to both single molecule based super resolution methods (PALM/STORM/F-PALM) and SIM, STED microscopy requires no post-processing to achieve a super resolution image and can be performed at video frame rates over small (2x2 micron) image areas. STED microscopy uses point spread function (PSF) engineering of the excitation laser to create an excitation volume with lateral dimensions below the diffraction limit. STED uses a second laser beam (which is delayed and red-shifted with respect to the excitation laser beam) that has an intensity distribution with a zero near the center (e.g. a donut beam). This donut or depletion beam turns off all of the fluorophores at the periphery of the excitation focal spot through stimulated emission to their dark ground state such that the effective excitation volume can be squeezed below the diffraction limit. Scanning of this squeezed excitation volume across the specimen yields super-resolution images. The concept of STED microscopy was first proposed in 1994 by S. Hell [3

3. S. W. Hell and J. Wichmann, “Breaking the diffraction resolution limit by stimulated emission: stimulated-emission-depletion fluorescence microscopy,” Opt. Lett. 19(11), 780–782 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and first experimentally demonstrated in 1999 by the same group [12

12. T. A. Klar and S. W. Hell, “Subdiffraction resolution in far-field fluorescence microscopy,” Opt. Lett. 24(14), 954–956 (1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Other techniques sharing the same concept include ground state depletion (GSD) microscopy [13

13. S. W. Hell and M. Kroug, “Ground-state-depletion fluorscence microscopy: A concept for breaking the diffraction resolution limit,” Appl. Phys. B 60(5), 495–497 (1995). [CrossRef]

] in which fluorophores are trapped in a dark triplet state and reversible saturable optical fluorescence transitions (RESOLFT) microscopy [14

14. M. Hofmann, C. Eggeling, S. Jakobs, and S. W. Hell, “Breaking the diffraction barrier in fluorescence microscopy at low light intensities by using reversibly photoswitchable proteins,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102(49), 17565–17569 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] where fluorophores are switched off by light. The temporal resolution for the techniques in this category is highly dependent on the fluorescence recovery rate after depletion, the spatial resolution and the scale of the field of view. Moreover, as a point scanning technique, any improvement in lateral resolution in STED by necessity increases image acquisition time in a quadratic fashion. Nevertheless, as mentioned above, video-rate STED imaging with a resolution of 62 nm has been reported, but the field of view was limited to approximately 2x2 microns [15

15. V. Westphal, S. O. Rizzoli, M. A. Lauterbach, D. Kamin, R. Jahn, and S. W. Hell, “Video-rate far-field optical nanoscopy dissects synaptic vesicle movement,” Science 320(5873), 246–249 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].

In this paper, we propose a scheme that can reduce the thickness of a light-sheet below the diffraction limit by using a higher-order Bessel beam to deplete the spontaneous emission around the Bessel beam used for excitation. As compared to conventional point scanning STED microscopy, line scanned Bessel beam STED (BB-STED) microscopy has the potential for orders of magnitude faster imaging speeds, enabling video-rate imaging over large volumes, such as whole mammalian cells. In addition, the plane-illumination used in BB-STED limits the light to a thin layer of the sample and thus significantly reduces photobleaching and photodamage above and below the focal plane. The same concept can also be applied to GSD microscopy as well as RESOLFT microscopy with the added advantage that lower depletion powers are required.

2. Bessel-like excitation and STED laser beams

In the proposed imaging method, we combine the advantages of STED (super resolution imaging without post-processing) with the advantages of selective plane illumination microscopy with scanned Bessel beams (fast, 3D imaging with minimal photodamage). This requires the creation of two co-aligned laser beams, one for fluorescence excitation and the other for stimulated emission depletion, as shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of a Bessel beam STED microscope. The inset (a) and (b) show the side and front views of the excitation (green) and STED beams (red), respectively, inside the detection volume denoted by the dashed box. The coordinate systems with and without prime define the detection and excitation geometries respectively. A galvo-mirror is needed for scanning both of the lasers to form an excitation plane and is omitted here for simplicity.

To reduce the effective diameter of the excitation source below that of a diffraction-limited Bessel beam, we propose to create a coaxial hollow beam for stimulated emission depletion that also has favorable (low divergence) properties. This hollow beam can be created by a ring phase plate (the phase mask 1 in Fig. 1) that has a phase that ramps from 0 to 2π when going around the ring, as shown in Fig. 3(a).
Fig. 3 Creation of Bessel beams for spontaneous emission depletion. (a) The annular mask with a ring transmission and an azimuthal phase delay ramped from 0 to 2π for creating a first-order Bessel beam; (b) Calculated intensity distribution in the r-z plane for the first-order Bessel beam. (c) Calculated intensity distribution in x-y plane with z = 0 for the first-order Bessel beam. (d) Lateral intensity profiles of the first-order (black) and second-order (red) Bessel beams. (e) Z-dependence of the peak intensity profiles of the first-order (black) and second-order (red) Bessel beams. Calculations are made for annular masks with NABesselMax=0.53and NABesselMin=0.50for both Bessel beams. Intensities are scaled to the maximum of the first-order Bessel beam.
The pupil function then takes the form:
P(ρ,θ)={ejθ,ρmin<ρ<ρmax0,otherwise,
(3)
with θ being the azimuthal angle of the phase plate. Equation (1) reduces to:
U(r,φ,z)=A2πejkzjλfejφJ1(kfrρ)ejkf2zρ2ρdρ,
(4)
where φ is the azimuthal angle at the focal plane. Note the beam created from this phase plate is a first-order Bessel beam (which has zero intensity at r = 0). The angle-dependent phase factor in front of the integration only affects the amplitude of the field and doesn’t contribute to the intensity distribution. For this reason, the beam created is axially symmetric. Figure 3 shows the intensity distribution of a first-order Bessel beam created by a ring phase plate with radii characterized by NABesselMax=0.53andNABesselMin=0.50. The wavelength used in these calculations, 750 nm, was chosen as it well suited for stimulated emission depletion of the organic dye Atto 647N. As shown, such a beam also maintains a small beam waist over large axial extensions, 53 µm (FWHM), which is a bit longer than that of the zero-order Bessel beam with the same NABesselparameters. More importantly, the first-order Bessel beam has a hollow core with no light intensity, meaning this beam (when used as a depletion source for the zeroth order Bessel excitation beam) depletes fluorescence only at the periphery of the excitation beam. We also explored the use of higher order Bessel beams for stimulated depletion, which can be created by in a similar way with a ring phase plate that has a phase ramped from 0 to integer multiples of 2π. However, for these higher order depletion beams, the intensity of the central ring is relatively lower and its diameter is larger such that higher STED power is required to achieve same depletion efficiency as compared to a first-order Bessel beam, as shown in Fig. 3(d).

3. Bessel Beam STED

Fig. 4 Spontaneous emission depletion by a first-order Bessel beam. (a) Probability of spontaneous decay on the focal plane (z = 0) when an average STED power of 1 W is applied. (b) Effective excitation profile in the r-z plane when an average STED power of 1 W is applied. (c) Effective lateral excitation profile at different STED laser powers. (d) Dependence of the effective diameter of the excitation laser on the STED laser power. The solid curve is an inverse-square root fit. Calculations use the organic dye Atto 647N and a STED laser operating at 750 nm with a pulse length of 250 ps.
Figure 4(a) shows the probability of spontaneous decay in the focal plane (z = 0) when Atto 647N with 1/ks=3.9 ns, 1/kvib=5 ps, σSTED=1016cm2 [32

32. M. Leutenegger, C. Eggeling, and S. W. Hell, “Analytical description of STED microscopy performance,” Opt. Express 18(25), 26417–26429 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 33

33. E. Rittweger, B. Rankin, V. Westphal, and S. Hell, “Fluorescence depletion mechanisms in super-resolving STED microscopy,” Chem. Phys. Lett. 442(4–6), 483–487 (2007). [CrossRef]

] is excited by a STED laser at 750 nm with a pulse length of 250 ps and an average power of 1 W. Note that ηps is unity at r = 0 and effectively zero around this central peak (due to stimulated emission rather than spontaneous emission dominating in this region). Depletion also occurs progressing further radially away from the center of the STED laser, but this depletion is not as efficient as that at the central region due to the lower power density. The product of the probability of spontaneous decay and the excitation profile (under non-saturating conditions) gives the effective excitation volume, and is shown in Fig. 4(b). As compared to the excitation profile as shown in Fig. 2(b), the diameter of the effective excitation profile is significantly reduced from the original value of 480 nm to 100 nm when 1 W average STED power is applied. The more STED power is applied, the smaller the effective excitation volume becomes (see Fig. 4(c)). The FWHM of the effective excitation volume decreases with a square root power dependence, the same as that of a conventional STED microscope, as shown in Fig. 4(d). We want to point out that use of circular polarization for excitation and depletion will squeeze the effective excitation volume symmetrically in the lateral dimensions for sparse molecules with fixed orientations [34

34. V. Westphal and S. W. Hell, “Nanoscale resolution in the focal plane of an optical microscope,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94(14), 143903 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].

4. Reduction of the side-lobes of the Bessel beam

Although the spontaneous emission around the central lobe of the excitation beam is efficiently depleted, the emission at the side bands of the excitation beam is less affected, as shown above. The reason for this is primarily due to the fact that the side-bands of the STED laser are not overlapped with those of the excitation laser, with diminished depletion also partially due to the lower light intensity of side bands of the STED laser. While the emission at higher order side-bands can be efficiently rejected by confocal line detection [28

28. P. Zhang, P. M. Goodwin, and J. H. Werner, “Fast, 3D imaging via confocal line scanning of a Bessel beam using a single galvo mirror,” Proc. SPIE 8947, 1K–8K (2014).

], the emission at lower orders, especially the first order side-band, will degrade the performance of BB-STED. While the side-band effects of the excitation beam can be reduced by two-photon excitation [35

35. P. Bianchini, B. Harke, S. Galiani, G. Vicidomini, and A. Diaspro, “Single-wavelength two-photon excitation-stimulated emission depletion (SW2PE-STED) superresolution imaging,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109(17), 6390–6393 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 36

36. G. Moneron and S. W. Hell, “Two-photon excitation STED microscopy,” Opt. Express 17(17), 14567–14573 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], here we present an alternative method that uses destructive interference to minimize the side-band contribution. In particular, the coherent superposition of a second-order Bessel beam with a zeroth-order Bessel beam yields a beam with reduced side-bands within a range of azimuthal angles that also has low-divergence properties.
Fig. 5 Spontaneous emission depletion using a Bessel beam with reduced side-lobes for excitation. (a) Annular mask used for creating a coherent superposition of zero-order and second-order Bessel beams; (b) Calculated intensity distribution of the excitation beam in y-z plane. (c) Calculated intensity distribution of excitation beam in x-y plane with z = 0. (d) Effective lateral excitation when the mixed Bessel beams are used for excitation and a first-order Bessel beam with an average power of 1 W is used for spontaneous emission depletion.
Figure 5 shows the phase plate design for such a beam and the resulting intensity distribution. The parameters used to create the zero-order Bessel beam are NABesselmax1=0.53 and NABesselmin1=0.516, and those used to create the second-order Bessel beam are NABesselmax2=0.516and NABesselmin2=0.5. As shown, destructive coherent superposition of the two beams at φ = 0 and φ = π leads to significantly reduced side-bands. To find the parameters for minimizing the side-band heights, we keep the parameters NABesselmax1and NABesselmin2 fixed and change NABesselmin1(=NABesselmax2) with a step size of 0.001, with the ratio of the height of the first-order side-band to that of the central peak used for optimization. Figure 5(c) also shows constructive interference resulting in increased side-bands at φ = ± π/2. Figure 5(d) shows the effective lateral excitation profile when the mixed Bessel beams are used for excitation. The resulted effective excitation profile exhibits the same dependency on the azimuthal angle, that is reduced side-bands at φ = 0 and φ = π while increased side-bands at φ = ± π/2. However, if a detection objective (e.g. a CFI APO 40x/0.8 NA water-dipping objective with a working distance of 3.5 mm, Nikon) is aligned with its optical axis along y with the fluorescence detected at 90° from the axis of the excitation beam, as shown in Fig. 1, the contribution of fluorescence emitted from the side-bands at φ = ± π/2 can be mitigated by confocal line detection. In particular, using a slit as a spatial filter in confocal line detection spatially filters both in the direction perpendicular to the slit as well as axially. The axial rejection, however, is a weak function of Z, whereas the perpendicular spatial filtering is a strong function of distance. Here, the destructively interfered regions of the excitation beams are aligned along the optical axis of the collection objective, minimizing the need for spatial filtering in this direction. To demonstrate this arrangement improves the performance of BB-STED, we calculated the modulation transfer function for this microscope (and competing variants) in the frequency domain. The modulation transfer function displays the spatial frequencies transmitted by the imaging system, with superior resolutions (e.g. smaller features) appearing as larger spatial frequencies.
Fig. 6 Modulation transfer functions for various microscopes. The frequencies are normalized to the maximum resolvable frequency under a wide-field microscope, kmax=NA/(0.61λ). A detection objective with NA = 0.8 is used in the calculations. A STED beam with an average power of 1 W is used for spontaneous emission depletion.
As shown in Fig. 6, a confocal Bessel beam microscope (Confocal-BB [28

28. P. Zhang, P. M. Goodwin, and J. H. Werner, “Fast, 3D imaging via confocal line scanning of a Bessel beam using a single galvo mirror,” Proc. SPIE 8947, 1K–8K (2014).

]) improves the resolution along the optical axis of the detection objective (here denoted z’ as shown in Fig. 1) by a factor of 6 as compared to wide-field illumination. A BB-STED microscope further improves the resolution by a factor of ~4 in both the z’ and x’ directions. The y’-resolution (the direction of excitation laser beam propagation) in BB-STED is the same as confocal-BB microscopy and wide-field illumination and is limited by diffraction. The fringes appearing in kz' in BB-STED microscopy imply information loss at some frequencies and arise from the side-bands. These fringes can be mitigated when a Bessel beam with suppressed side-bands (BB-STED SS) is used for excitation.

5. Discussion

In summary, we present an approach termed BB-STED that uses a first order Bessel beam to deplete the spontaneous emission around a zero-order or mixed Bessel beams that are used for excitation. Dependent on the STED power applied, we have shown that the effective diameter of the excitation beam can be reduced below the diffraction limit. When this beam is scanned across a specimen to form an ultra-thin light-sheet and the fluorescence is detected at 90° from the excitation direction, high speed super-resolution imaging can be realized. As compared to a conventional STED microscope where a point-scanning scheme is used and therefore the imaging speed is inversely proportional to the imaging area in a quadratic fashion, a line-scanning scheme has a linear acquisition time dependence with area, enabling whole cell imaging at supra-video frame rates. For a 20 x 20 µm field of view (comparable to the size of a mammalian cell) and with a resolution of 50 nm, we anticipate BB-STED will be approximately 400 times faster than conventional STED.

The resolution along the optical axis of the Bessel beams is still limited by diffraction in our current scheme. Our future work will focus on creating a pattern with well separated minima and maxima along the excitation axis such that an array of excitation volumes with all dimensions below the diffraction limit can be scanned across a specimen to improve the resolution along the excitation axis. Another option is rotation of the sample under study, which would increase the acquisition time by a factor of two and add a post-processing step. Switching the excitation between the two objectives used for imaging and excitation is another potential solution for more isotropic super resolution imaging, but greatly increases instrument complexity and also adds post processing steps. Nevertheless, we note that in the current configuration, BB-STED achieves super-resolution in two dimensions and a resolution of ~0.76λ (for a detection objective of NA = 0.8, and can be as high as 0.55λ when it is replaced with an objective of NA = 1.1 [37

37. L. Gao, L. Shao, C. D. Higgins, J. S. Poulton, M. Peifer, M. W. Davidson, X. Wu, B. Goldstein, and E. Betzig, “Noninvasive imaging beyond the diffraction limit of 3D dynamics in thickly fluorescent specimens,” Cell 151(6), 1370–1385 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]) in the third dimension, the total resolution of BB-STED is still better than a conventional STED microscope that has an axial resolution of ~λ.

In addition to its fast imaging speed, BB-STED microscopy has another substantial advantage over a conventional STED microscope: reduced sample photobeaching and photodamage. As compared to epi-illumination and conventional STED microscopy that excites the sample above and below the focal plane [38

38. P. T. C. So, C. Y. Dong, B. R. Masters, and K. M. Berland, “Two-photon excitation fluorescence microscopy,” Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2(1), 399–429 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], plane illumination in a BB-STED microscope limits the light to a thin layer of the sample coincident with the focal plane. Although the side-bands of the Bessel beams illuminate the sections of the sample above and below the focal plane, the resulting photobleaching and photodamage is less severe due to their low intensities. Moreover, while high laser powers are used for stimulate emission depletion in STED and BB-STED microscopy, due to the rapid image acquisitions possible in a line scanning mode, the overall cellular photo-damage and photo-toxicity is orders of magnitude less for BB-STED compared to conventional STED.

Finally we note that while the laser powers needed to demonstrate sub-diffraction limited imaging are high, they are within the range of commercial high power laser sources, with a 1W depletion beam achieving λ/6 resolution. We note the transmission of the phase mask can be increased substantially by preconditioning the laser beam into an annulus by an axicon-lens pair [25

25. T. A. Planchon, L. Gao, D. E. Milkie, M. W. Davidson, J. A. Galbraith, C. G. Galbraith, and E. Betzig, “Rapid three-dimensional isotropic imaging of living cells using Bessel beam plane illumination,” Nat. Methods 8(5), 417–423 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. An alternative method is to create a zero-order Bessel beam with an axicon and then to pass it through a phase plate with its azimuthal phase delay ramped from 0 to 2π. Moreover, these Bessel-Beam modes of excitation and depletion are also entirely compatible with other types of super-resolution imaging based upon switching molecules between a dark and fluorescent state. In particular, BB-STED type excitation and detection is compatible with techniques such as ground state depletion microscopy (which requires 3-4 orders of magnitude less laser power than in STED) or RESOLFT microscopy (which also requires orders of magnitude less laser power than in STED).

Acknowledgments

This work was supported through Los Alamos National Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) and was performed at the Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies, a U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences user facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory (Contract DE-AC52-06NA25396).

References and links

1.

E. Abbe, “Beiträge zur Theorie des Mikroskops und der mikroskopischen Wahrnehmung,” Arch. Mikrosk. Anatomie 9, 413–418 (1873).

2.

D. W. Pohl and D. Courjon, Near Field Optics (Kluwer, 1993).

3.

S. W. Hell and J. Wichmann, “Breaking the diffraction resolution limit by stimulated emission: stimulated-emission-depletion fluorescence microscopy,” Opt. Lett. 19(11), 780–782 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4.

M. G. Gustafsson, “Surpassing the lateral resolution limit by a factor of two using structured illumination microscopy,” J. Microsc. 198(2), 82–87 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

5.

E. Betzig, G. H. Patterson, R. Sougrat, O. W. Lindwasser, S. Olenych, J. S. Bonifacino, M. W. Davidson, J. Lippincott-Schwartz, and H. F. Hess, “Imaging intracellular fluorescent proteins at nanometer resolution,” Science 313(5793), 1642–1645 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

6.

S. T. Hess, T. P. K. Girirajan, and M. D. Mason, “Ultra-high resolution imaging by fluorescence photoactivation localization microscopy,” Biophys. J. 91(11), 4258–4272 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7.

M. J. Rust, M. Bates, and X. Zhuang, “Sub-diffraction-limit imaging by stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (STORM),” Nat. Methods 3(10), 793–795 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

8.

C. S. Smith, N. Joseph, B. Rieger, and K. A. Lidke, “Fast, single-molecule localization that achieves theoretically minimum uncertainty,” Nat. Methods 7(5), 373–375 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

9.

S. Quirin, S. R. P. Pavani, and R. Piestun, “Optimal 3D single-molecule localization for superresolution microscopy with aberrations and engineered point spread functions,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109(3), 675–679 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

10.

B. Huang, H. Babcock, and X. Zhuang, “Breaking the diffraction barrier: super-resolution imaging of cells,” Cell 143(7), 1047–1058 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

11.

P. Kner, B. B. Chhun, E. R. Griffis, L. Winoto, and M. G. L. Gustafsson, “Super-resolution video microscopy of live cells by structured illumination,” Nat. Methods 6(5), 339–342 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

12.

T. A. Klar and S. W. Hell, “Subdiffraction resolution in far-field fluorescence microscopy,” Opt. Lett. 24(14), 954–956 (1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

13.

S. W. Hell and M. Kroug, “Ground-state-depletion fluorscence microscopy: A concept for breaking the diffraction resolution limit,” Appl. Phys. B 60(5), 495–497 (1995). [CrossRef]

14.

M. Hofmann, C. Eggeling, S. Jakobs, and S. W. Hell, “Breaking the diffraction barrier in fluorescence microscopy at low light intensities by using reversibly photoswitchable proteins,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102(49), 17565–17569 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15.

V. Westphal, S. O. Rizzoli, M. A. Lauterbach, D. Kamin, R. Jahn, and S. W. Hell, “Video-rate far-field optical nanoscopy dissects synaptic vesicle movement,” Science 320(5873), 246–249 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16.

B. Huang, W. Wang, M. Bates, and X. Zhuang, “Three-dimensional super-resolution imaging by stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy,” Science 319(5864), 810–813 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

17.

S. R. P. Pavani, M. A. Thompson, J. S. Biteen, S. J. Lord, N. Liu, R. J. Twieg, R. Piestun, and W. E. Moerner, “Three-dimensional, single-molecule fluorescence imaging beyond the diffraction limit by using a double-helix point spread function,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106(9), 2995–2999 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

18.

M. G. Gustafsson, L. Shao, P. M. Carlton, C. J. Wang, I. N. Golubovskaya, W. Z. Cande, D. A. Agard, and J. W. Sedat, “Three-dimensional resolution doubling in wide-field fluorescence microscopy by structured illumination,” Biophys. J. 94(12), 4957–4970 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

19.

M. Dyba and S. W. Hell, “Focal spots of size λ/23 open up far-field fluorescence microscopy at 33 nm axial resolution,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 88(16), 163901 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

20.

R. Schmidt, C. A. Wurm, S. Jakobs, J. Engelhardt, A. Egner, and S. W. Hell, “Spherical nanosized focal spot unravels the interior of cells,” Nat. Methods 5(6), 539–544 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

21.

J. G. Ritter, R. Veith, A. Veenendaal, J. P. Siebrasse, and U. Kubitscheck, “Light sheet microscopy for single molecule tracking in living tissue,” PLoS ONE 5(7), e11639 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

22.

J. C. M. Gebhardt, D. M. Suter, R. Roy, Z. W. Zhao, A. R. Chapman, S. Basu, T. Maniatis, and X. S. Xie, “Single-molecule imaging of transcription factor binding to DNA in live mammalian cells,” Nat. Methods 10(5), 421–426 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

23.

F. Cella Zanacchi, Z. Lavagnino, M. Perrone Donnorso, A. Del Bue, L. Furia, M. Faretta, and A. Diaspro, “Live-cell 3D super-resolution imaging in thick biological samples,” Nat. Methods 8(12), 1047–1049 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

24.

J. Huisken, J. Swoger, F. Del Bene, J. Wittbrodt, and E. H. K. Stelzer, “Optical sectioning deep inside live embryos by selective plane illumination microscopy,” Science 305(5686), 1007–1009 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

25.

T. A. Planchon, L. Gao, D. E. Milkie, M. W. Davidson, J. A. Galbraith, C. G. Galbraith, and E. Betzig, “Rapid three-dimensional isotropic imaging of living cells using Bessel beam plane illumination,” Nat. Methods 8(5), 417–423 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

26.

F. O. Fahrbach and A. Rohrbach, “Propagation stability of self-reconstructing Bessel beams enables contrast-enhanced imaging in thick media,” Nat. Commun. 3, 632 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

27.

F. O. Fahrbach, V. Gurchenkov, K. Alessandri, P. Nassoy, and A. Rohrbach, “Light-sheet microscopy in thick media using scanned Bessel beams and two-photon fluorescence excitation,” Opt. Express 21(11), 13824–13839 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

28.

P. Zhang, P. M. Goodwin, and J. H. Werner, “Fast, 3D imaging via confocal line scanning of a Bessel beam using a single galvo mirror,” Proc. SPIE 8947, 1K–8K (2014).

29.

M. Friedrich, Q. Gan, V. Ermolayev, and G. S. Harms, “STED-SPIM: stimulated emission depletion improves sheet illumination microscopy resolution,” Biophys. J. 100(8), L43–L45 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

30.

J. Durnin, J. J. Miceli Jr, and J. H. Eberly, “Diffraction-free beams,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 58(15), 1499–1501 (1987). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

31.

M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics (Cambridge University, 1999).

32.

M. Leutenegger, C. Eggeling, and S. W. Hell, “Analytical description of STED microscopy performance,” Opt. Express 18(25), 26417–26429 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

33.

E. Rittweger, B. Rankin, V. Westphal, and S. Hell, “Fluorescence depletion mechanisms in super-resolving STED microscopy,” Chem. Phys. Lett. 442(4–6), 483–487 (2007). [CrossRef]

34.

V. Westphal and S. W. Hell, “Nanoscale resolution in the focal plane of an optical microscope,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94(14), 143903 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

35.

P. Bianchini, B. Harke, S. Galiani, G. Vicidomini, and A. Diaspro, “Single-wavelength two-photon excitation-stimulated emission depletion (SW2PE-STED) superresolution imaging,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109(17), 6390–6393 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

36.

G. Moneron and S. W. Hell, “Two-photon excitation STED microscopy,” Opt. Express 17(17), 14567–14573 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

37.

L. Gao, L. Shao, C. D. Higgins, J. S. Poulton, M. Peifer, M. W. Davidson, X. Wu, B. Goldstein, and E. Betzig, “Noninvasive imaging beyond the diffraction limit of 3D dynamics in thickly fluorescent specimens,” Cell 151(6), 1370–1385 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

38.

P. T. C. So, C. Y. Dong, B. R. Masters, and K. M. Berland, “Two-photon excitation fluorescence microscopy,” Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2(1), 399–429 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

OCIS Codes
(170.2520) Medical optics and biotechnology : Fluorescence microscopy
(170.5810) Medical optics and biotechnology : Scanning microscopy
(170.6900) Medical optics and biotechnology : Three-dimensional microscopy
(180.1790) Microscopy : Confocal microscopy

ToC Category:
Microscopy

History
Original Manuscript: March 18, 2014
Revised Manuscript: May 7, 2014
Manuscript Accepted: May 8, 2014
Published: May 14, 2014

Virtual Issues
Vol. 9, Iss. 7 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Citation
P. Zhang, P. M. Goodwin, and J. H. Werner, "Fast, super resolution imaging via Bessel-beam stimulated emission depletion microscopy," Opt. Express 22, 12398-12409 (2014)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-22-10-12398


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. E. Abbe, “Beiträge zur Theorie des Mikroskops und der mikroskopischen Wahrnehmung,” Arch. Mikrosk. Anatomie 9, 413–418 (1873).
  2. D. W. Pohl and D. Courjon, Near Field Optics (Kluwer, 1993).
  3. S. W. Hell, J. Wichmann, “Breaking the diffraction resolution limit by stimulated emission: stimulated-emission-depletion fluorescence microscopy,” Opt. Lett. 19(11), 780–782 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. M. G. Gustafsson, “Surpassing the lateral resolution limit by a factor of two using structured illumination microscopy,” J. Microsc. 198(2), 82–87 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. E. Betzig, G. H. Patterson, R. Sougrat, O. W. Lindwasser, S. Olenych, J. S. Bonifacino, M. W. Davidson, J. Lippincott-Schwartz, H. F. Hess, “Imaging intracellular fluorescent proteins at nanometer resolution,” Science 313(5793), 1642–1645 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. S. T. Hess, T. P. K. Girirajan, M. D. Mason, “Ultra-high resolution imaging by fluorescence photoactivation localization microscopy,” Biophys. J. 91(11), 4258–4272 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. M. J. Rust, M. Bates, X. Zhuang, “Sub-diffraction-limit imaging by stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy (STORM),” Nat. Methods 3(10), 793–795 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. C. S. Smith, N. Joseph, B. Rieger, K. A. Lidke, “Fast, single-molecule localization that achieves theoretically minimum uncertainty,” Nat. Methods 7(5), 373–375 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. S. Quirin, S. R. P. Pavani, R. Piestun, “Optimal 3D single-molecule localization for superresolution microscopy with aberrations and engineered point spread functions,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109(3), 675–679 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. B. Huang, H. Babcock, X. Zhuang, “Breaking the diffraction barrier: super-resolution imaging of cells,” Cell 143(7), 1047–1058 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. P. Kner, B. B. Chhun, E. R. Griffis, L. Winoto, M. G. L. Gustafsson, “Super-resolution video microscopy of live cells by structured illumination,” Nat. Methods 6(5), 339–342 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. T. A. Klar, S. W. Hell, “Subdiffraction resolution in far-field fluorescence microscopy,” Opt. Lett. 24(14), 954–956 (1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. S. W. Hell, M. Kroug, “Ground-state-depletion fluorscence microscopy: A concept for breaking the diffraction resolution limit,” Appl. Phys. B 60(5), 495–497 (1995). [CrossRef]
  14. M. Hofmann, C. Eggeling, S. Jakobs, S. W. Hell, “Breaking the diffraction barrier in fluorescence microscopy at low light intensities by using reversibly photoswitchable proteins,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102(49), 17565–17569 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. V. Westphal, S. O. Rizzoli, M. A. Lauterbach, D. Kamin, R. Jahn, S. W. Hell, “Video-rate far-field optical nanoscopy dissects synaptic vesicle movement,” Science 320(5873), 246–249 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. B. Huang, W. Wang, M. Bates, X. Zhuang, “Three-dimensional super-resolution imaging by stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy,” Science 319(5864), 810–813 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. S. R. P. Pavani, M. A. Thompson, J. S. Biteen, S. J. Lord, N. Liu, R. J. Twieg, R. Piestun, W. E. Moerner, “Three-dimensional, single-molecule fluorescence imaging beyond the diffraction limit by using a double-helix point spread function,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106(9), 2995–2999 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. M. G. Gustafsson, L. Shao, P. M. Carlton, C. J. Wang, I. N. Golubovskaya, W. Z. Cande, D. A. Agard, J. W. Sedat, “Three-dimensional resolution doubling in wide-field fluorescence microscopy by structured illumination,” Biophys. J. 94(12), 4957–4970 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. M. Dyba, S. W. Hell, “Focal spots of size λ/23 open up far-field fluorescence microscopy at 33 nm axial resolution,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 88(16), 163901 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. R. Schmidt, C. A. Wurm, S. Jakobs, J. Engelhardt, A. Egner, S. W. Hell, “Spherical nanosized focal spot unravels the interior of cells,” Nat. Methods 5(6), 539–544 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. J. G. Ritter, R. Veith, A. Veenendaal, J. P. Siebrasse, U. Kubitscheck, “Light sheet microscopy for single molecule tracking in living tissue,” PLoS ONE 5(7), e11639 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. J. C. M. Gebhardt, D. M. Suter, R. Roy, Z. W. Zhao, A. R. Chapman, S. Basu, T. Maniatis, X. S. Xie, “Single-molecule imaging of transcription factor binding to DNA in live mammalian cells,” Nat. Methods 10(5), 421–426 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. F. Cella Zanacchi, Z. Lavagnino, M. Perrone Donnorso, A. Del Bue, L. Furia, M. Faretta, A. Diaspro, “Live-cell 3D super-resolution imaging in thick biological samples,” Nat. Methods 8(12), 1047–1049 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. J. Huisken, J. Swoger, F. Del Bene, J. Wittbrodt, E. H. K. Stelzer, “Optical sectioning deep inside live embryos by selective plane illumination microscopy,” Science 305(5686), 1007–1009 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. T. A. Planchon, L. Gao, D. E. Milkie, M. W. Davidson, J. A. Galbraith, C. G. Galbraith, E. Betzig, “Rapid three-dimensional isotropic imaging of living cells using Bessel beam plane illumination,” Nat. Methods 8(5), 417–423 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. F. O. Fahrbach, A. Rohrbach, “Propagation stability of self-reconstructing Bessel beams enables contrast-enhanced imaging in thick media,” Nat. Commun. 3, 632 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. F. O. Fahrbach, V. Gurchenkov, K. Alessandri, P. Nassoy, A. Rohrbach, “Light-sheet microscopy in thick media using scanned Bessel beams and two-photon fluorescence excitation,” Opt. Express 21(11), 13824–13839 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. P. Zhang, P. M. Goodwin, J. H. Werner, “Fast, 3D imaging via confocal line scanning of a Bessel beam using a single galvo mirror,” Proc. SPIE 8947, 1K–8K (2014).
  29. M. Friedrich, Q. Gan, V. Ermolayev, G. S. Harms, “STED-SPIM: stimulated emission depletion improves sheet illumination microscopy resolution,” Biophys. J. 100(8), L43–L45 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. J. Durnin, J. J. Miceli, J. H. Eberly, “Diffraction-free beams,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 58(15), 1499–1501 (1987). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics (Cambridge University, 1999).
  32. M. Leutenegger, C. Eggeling, S. W. Hell, “Analytical description of STED microscopy performance,” Opt. Express 18(25), 26417–26429 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. E. Rittweger, B. Rankin, V. Westphal, S. Hell, “Fluorescence depletion mechanisms in super-resolving STED microscopy,” Chem. Phys. Lett. 442(4–6), 483–487 (2007). [CrossRef]
  34. V. Westphal, S. W. Hell, “Nanoscale resolution in the focal plane of an optical microscope,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94(14), 143903 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. P. Bianchini, B. Harke, S. Galiani, G. Vicidomini, A. Diaspro, “Single-wavelength two-photon excitation-stimulated emission depletion (SW2PE-STED) superresolution imaging,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109(17), 6390–6393 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. G. Moneron, S. W. Hell, “Two-photon excitation STED microscopy,” Opt. Express 17(17), 14567–14573 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. L. Gao, L. Shao, C. D. Higgins, J. S. Poulton, M. Peifer, M. W. Davidson, X. Wu, B. Goldstein, E. Betzig, “Noninvasive imaging beyond the diffraction limit of 3D dynamics in thickly fluorescent specimens,” Cell 151(6), 1370–1385 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. P. T. C. So, C. Y. Dong, B. R. Masters, K. M. Berland, “Two-photon excitation fluorescence microscopy,” Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2(1), 399–429 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited