OSA's Digital Library

Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

| EXPLORING THE INTERFACE OF LIGHT AND BIOMEDICINE

  • Editors: Andrew Dunn and Anthony Durkin
  • Vol. 7, Iss. 12 — Dec. 19, 2012

Optics InfoBase > Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics > Volume 7 > Issue 12 > Page 26778

« Show journal navigation

Internal structure of an intact Convallaria majalis pollen grain observed with X-ray Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging

Adrian P. Mancuso, Matthew R. Groves, Oleg E. Polozhentsev, Garth J. Williams, Ian McNulty, Claude Antony, Rachel Santarella-Mellwig, Aleksander V. Soldatov, Victor Lamzin, Andrew G. Peele, Keith A. Nugent, and Ivan A. Vartanyants  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 20, Issue 24, pp. 26778-26785 (2012)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.20.026778


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (1479 KB)


Advanced Search

Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

We have applied Fresnel Coherent Diffractive Imaging (FCDI) to image an intact pollen grain from Convallaria majalis. This approach allows us to resolve internal structures without the requirement to chemically treat or slice the sample into thin sections. Coherent X-ray diffraction data from this pollen grain–composed of a hologram and higher resolution scattering information–was collected at a photon energy of 1820 eV and reconstructed using an iterative algorithm. A comparison with images recorded using transmission electron microscopy demonstrates that, while the resolution of these images is limited by the available flux and mechanical stability, we observed structures internal to the pollen grain–the intine/exine separations and pore dimensions–finer than 60 nm. The potential of this technique for further biological imaging applications is discussed.

© 2012 OSA

1. Introduction

Pollen grains are male gametophytes of higher plants that comprise the plant genetic information as well as water-soluble proteins and glycoproteins. These proteins control pollen-stigma recognition, fertilization and also play a role in plant defense mechanisms [1

H. Breiteneder, K. Pettenburger, A. Bito, R. Valenta, D. Kraft, H. Rumpold, O. Scheiner, and M. Breitenbach, “The gene coding for the major birch pollen allergen Betv1, is highly homologous to a pea disease resistance response gene,” EMBO J. 8(7), 1935–1938 (1989). [PubMed]

], however, these glycoproteins also stimulate IgE antibodies when in contact with the mucosa of sensitive individuals. This stimulation results in type I allergic symptoms typical of hayfever, e.g., rhino conjunctivitis and asthma [2

H. Breiteneder, F. Ferreira, K. Hoffmann-Sommergruber, C. Ebner, M. Breitenbach, H. Rumpold, D. Kraft, and O. Scheiner, “Four recombinant isoforms of Cor a I, the major allergen of hazel pollen, show different IgE-binding properties,” Eur. J. Biochem. 212(2), 355–362 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].

The outer wall of a pollen grain consists of two layers: a porous inner layer, the intine that is composed predominantly of cellulose, hemicellulose and pectins, and an outer layer, the exine, that is formed by various organic and inorganic substances. Amongst these is sporopollenin, a highly resistant biopolymer [3

R. J. Scott and A. D. Stead, eds., Molecular and Cellular Aspects of Plant Reproduction (Cambridge University Press, 1994).

] that is responsible for the high chemical robustness of the exine.

It has been shown that the allergens are rapidly released from pollen grains upon hydration [4

L. Belin and J. R. Rowley, “Demonstration of birch pollen allergen from isolated pollen grains using immunofluorescence and a single radial immunodiffusion technique,” Int. Arch. Allergy Appl. Immunol. 40(6), 754–769 (1971). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 5

S. Vrtala, M. Grote, M. Duchêne, R. van Ree, D. Kraft, O. Scheiner, and R. Valenta, “Properties of tree and grass pollen allergens: reinvestigation of the linkage between solubility and allergenicity,” Int. Arch. Allergy Immunol. 102(2), 160–169 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. In accordance with this finding, attempts to localize the birch major allergen, Bet v1, protein on ultrathin sections of birch pollen grains by immunogold labeling with monoclonal antibodies were successful only after strictly anhydrous fixations of the pollen grains [6

M. Grote, “Ultrastructural morphology and allergen detection in birch pollen after aqueous, anhydrous-liquid, and vapor fixation techniques,” Microsc. Res. Tech. 21(3), 242–248 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

–8

M. Grote, S. Vrtala, and R. Valenta, “Monitoring of two allergens, Bet v I and profilin, in dry and rehydrated birch pollen by immunogold electron microscopy and immunoblotting,” J. Histochem. Cytochem. 41(5), 745–750 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The allergens were localized only in the cytoplasm of the pollen grains, while the intine, exine and the surface of the pollen grains remained unlabeled. However, when dry birch pollen grains are rehydrated for a short time, Bet v1 proteins are found in the wall and on the surface of the pollen grains after only 1 minute of hydration, while the density of labeling in the cytoplasm decreased. The allergens in the pollen wall were often detected in clusters, which suggest the presence of preferred pathways of allergens through the pollen wall [5

S. Vrtala, M. Grote, M. Duchêne, R. van Ree, D. Kraft, O. Scheiner, and R. Valenta, “Properties of tree and grass pollen allergens: reinvestigation of the linkage between solubility and allergenicity,” Int. Arch. Allergy Immunol. 102(2), 160–169 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 8

M. Grote, S. Vrtala, and R. Valenta, “Monitoring of two allergens, Bet v I and profilin, in dry and rehydrated birch pollen by immunogold electron microscopy and immunoblotting,” J. Histochem. Cytochem. 41(5), 745–750 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].

Existing techniques for imaging pollen grains, such as Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) [9

M. Takahashi, J. W. Nowicke, G. L. Webster, S. S. Orli, and S. Yankowski, “Pollen morphology, exine structure, and systematics of Acalyphoideae (Euphorbiaceae), part 3. Tribes Epiprineae (Epiprinus, Symphyllia, Adenochlaena, Cleidiocarpon, Koilodepas, Cladogynos, Cephalocrotonopsis, Cephalocroton, Cephalomappa), Adelieae (Adelia, Crotonogynopsis, Enriquebeltrania, Lasiocroton, Leucocroton), Alchorneae (Orfilea, Alchornea, Coelebogyne, Aparisthmium, Bocquillonia, Conceveiba, Gavarretia), Acalypheae pro parte (Ricinus, Adriana, Mercurialis, Leidesia, Dysopsis, Wetria, Cleidion, Sampantaea, Macaranga),” Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 110(1-2), 1–66 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] or Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) [10

L. Kovacik, J. M. Plitzko, M. Grote, and R. Reichelt, “Electron tomography of structures in the wall of hazel pollen grains,” J. Struct. Biol. 166(3), 263–271 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], provide either few internal details (SEM) or require the pollen grain to be sliced into thin segments for imaging (microtoming; TEM) because of multiple scattering. Such slicing, however, may lead to undesirable damage of fragile internal structures. One of the advantages of X-ray microscopy [11

D. Y. Parkinson, G. McDermott, L. D. Etkin, M. A. Le Gros, and C. A. Larabell, “Quantitative 3-D imaging of eukaryotic cells using soft X-ray tomography,” J. Struct. Biol. 162(3), 380–386 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] is that multiple scattering is negligible. As a result, the internal structures of few-micrometer-sized biological single particles, including pollen grains, can be visualized without sectioning the specimen. Another advantage of using x-rays is that sample staining is not required for feature contrast. We demonstrate here that Fresnel Coherent X-ray Diffractive Imaging (FCDI) [12

G. J. Williams, H. M. Quiney, B. B. Dhal, C. Q. Tran, K. A. Nugent, A. G. Peele, D. Paterson, and M. D. de Jonge, “Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97(2), 025506 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] is indeed capable of examining the interior structure of a single, intact, pollen grain without sectioning. We show an example image from a single projection of a Convallaria majalis pollen grain, and indicate that this technique may be generalized to three dimensions.

Coherent X-ray Diffractive Imaging (CXDI) is a relatively novel imaging technique capable of investigating comparatively thick specimens at potentially very high resolutions [13

J. Miao, P. Charalambous, J. Kirz, and D. Sayre, “Extending the methodology of X-ray crystallography to allow imaging of micrometre-sized non-crystalline specimens,” Nature 400(6742), 342–344 (1999). [CrossRef]

, 14

J. Miao, H. N. Chapman, J. Kirz, D. Sayre, and K. O. Hodgson, “Taking X-ray diffraction to the limit: macromolecular structures from femtosecond X-ray pulses and diffraction microscopy of cells with synchrotron radiation,” Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 33(1), 157–176 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. In this technique, a coherent x-ray beam illuminates a sample that alters the well-defined magnitude and phase distribution of this wave as it transits. The resulting wave, termed the exit surface wave (ESW), propagates downstream where it is measured by a two-dimensional detector. This diffraction pattern is usually recorded in the far-field and can be inverted through an iterative procedure to reconstruct the complete ESW, which in many cases can be treated as a projection image of the sample (for a review of CXDI methods see [15

K. A. Nugent, “Coherent methods in the X-ray sciences,” Adv. Phys. 59(1), 1–99 (2010). [CrossRef]

]). A number of applications to biological specimens have been shown in recent years [16

D. Shapiro, P. Thibault, T. Beetz, V. Elser, M. R. Howells, C. Jacobsen, J. Kirz, E. Lima, H. Miao, A. M. Neiman, and D. Sayre, “Biological imaging by soft x-ray diffraction microscopy,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102(43), 15343–15346 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

–22

A. P. Mancuso, T. Gorniak, F. Staier, O. M. Yefanov, R. Barth, C. Christophis, B. Reime, J. Gulden, A. Singer, M. E. Pettit, T. Nisius, T. Wilhein, C. Gutt, G. Grübel, N. Guerassimova, R. Treusch, J. Feldhaus, S. Eisebitt, E. Weckert, M. Grunze, A. Rosenhahn, and I. A. Vartanyants, “Coherent imaging of biological samples with femtosecond pulses at the free-electron laser FLASH,” New J. Phys. 12(3), 035003 (2010). [CrossRef]

] (for a review see [23

A. P. Mancuso, O. M. Yefanov, and I. A. Vartanyants, “Coherent diffractive imaging of biological samples at synchrotron and free electron laser facilities,” J. Biotechnol. 149(4), 229–237 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]).

One limitation of CXDI using plane-wave illumination of the sample is that it requires an object of finite extent for the inversion procedure to succeed. Larger or extended objects, such as pollen grains, are not accessible with the traditional implementation of this technique. In contrast, FCDI employs a well-defined, strong phase curvature, as shown in Fig. 1 . This allows the observation of sub-regions of a specimen and permits a more robust reconstruction, which additionally converges in fewer iterations compared to plane-wave CXDI measurements [24

H. M. Quiney, K. A. Nugent, and A. G. Peele, “Iterative image reconstruction algorithms using wave-front intensity and phase variation,” Opt. Lett. 30(13), 1638–1640 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The ability to observe sub-regions of a specimen is also provided by a scanning variant of CXDI, known as ptychography [25

J. M. Rodenburg, A. C. Hurst, A. G. Cullis, B. R. Dobson, F. Pfeiffer, O. Bunk, C. David, K. Jefimovs, and I. Johnson, “Hard-X-Ray Lensless Imaging of Extended Objects,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98(3), 034801 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

–27

K. Giewekemeyer, P. Thibault, S. Kalbfleisch, A. Beerlink, C. M. Kewish, M. Dierolf, F. Pfeiffer, and T. Salditt, “Quantitative biological imaging by ptychographic x-ray diffraction microscopy,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 107(2), 529–534 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] though at the expense of requiring many overlapping illumination positions, which is not necessary in FCDI [12

G. J. Williams, H. M. Quiney, B. B. Dhal, C. Q. Tran, K. A. Nugent, A. G. Peele, D. Paterson, and M. D. de Jonge, “Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97(2), 025506 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 28

G. J. Williams, E. Hanssen, A. G. Peele, M. A. Pfeifer, J. Clark, B. Abbey, G. Cadenazzi, M. D. de Jonge, S. Vogt, L. Tilley, and K. A. Nugent, “High-resolution X-ray imaging of Plasmodium falciparum-infected red blood cells,” Cytometry A 73(10), 949–957 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 29

D. J. Vine, G. J. Williams, B. Abbey, M. A. Pfeifer, J. N. Clark, M. D. De Jonge, I. McNulty, A. G. Peele, and K. A. Nugent, “Ptychographic Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging,” Phys. Rev. A 80(6), 063823 (2009). [CrossRef]

]. FCDI has been used to image whole biological specimens in the past [28

G. J. Williams, E. Hanssen, A. G. Peele, M. A. Pfeifer, J. Clark, B. Abbey, G. Cadenazzi, M. D. de Jonge, S. Vogt, L. Tilley, and K. A. Nugent, “High-resolution X-ray imaging of Plasmodium falciparum-infected red blood cells,” Cytometry A 73(10), 949–957 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], and we exploit its unique properties to image a sub-region of a pollen grain using only one illumination position on the sample.

Fig. 1 Schematic of the FCDI experiment. Coherent x-rays are focused using a zone plate to a focal plane upstream of the sample. The diverging beam (with phase curvature) is incident on a sub-region of the pollen grain. The radiation diffracted by the pollen grain propagates to the detector where it is measured. The radiation within the footprint of the direct beam forms an in-line hologram, while that outside is forms a coherent diffraction pattern. In our experiment the following geometrical conditions were used: z1 = 11.8 mm, z2 = 737.5 mm, z3 = 1.05 mm.

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Sample preparation

Pollen samples were obtained from commercially purchased Convallaria majalis. Flower heads were dissected and the stamens were suspended in water. The samples were briefly subjected to a rotary shaker and residual portions of the stamen were removed using forceps. The suspension was then briefly centrifuged at 200 rpm to remove excess water. The samples were again suspended by the brief application of a rotary shaker. For the FCDI experiment, a small volume (2 μl) of the suspension was pipetted onto a glass cover slip and the pollen grains were transferred onto 20 nm thick silicon nitride membranes using crystal mounting loops from Hampton Research. The unstained samples were then allowed to air dry and transferred to the beamline.

2.2 FCDI Experimental geometry

The imaging experiment was performed at the 2-ID-B undulator beamline [30

I. McNulty, A. Khounsary, Y. P. Feng, Y. Qian, J. Barraza, C. Benson, and D. Shu, “A beamline for 1–4 keV microscopy and coherence experiments at the Advanced Photon Source,” Rev. Sci. Instrum. 67(9), 3372 (1996). [CrossRef]

] at the Advanced Photon Source, Argonne National Laboratory, USA. The measurements were conducted in vacuum using a dedicated FCDI instrument [31

D. J. Vine, G. J. Williams, J. N. Clark, C. T. Putkunz, M. A. Pfeifer, D. Legnini, C. Roehrig, E. Wrobel, E. Huwald, G. van Riessen, B. Abbey, T. Beetz, J. Irwin, M. Feser, B. Hornberger, I. McNulty, K. A. Nugent, and A. G. Peele, “An in-vacuum x-ray diffraction microscope for use in the 0.7-2.9 keV range,” Rev. Sci. Instrum. 83(3), 033703 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] installed at the beamline. A 160 µm diameter zone plate with a 50 nm outermost zone was used to focus the 1820 eV monochromatic (ΔE/E≈1.25 × 10−3) x-rays to a focal spot size of ~60 nm with a focal length of z1 = 11.8 mm and a flux of ~1 × 108 ph/s. The sample was placed z3 = 1.05 mm downstream of the focus, giving a spot size of approximately 14 µm at the sample. A 15 µm order sorting aperture was placed at the focus to isolate the first diffraction order of the zone plate. The detector, a charge-coupled device camera (PI-MTE, 2048 × 2048 pixels each 13.5 × 13.5 µm2), was positioned at z2 = 737.5 mm downstream of the focus. We illuminated only a portion of the entire pollen grain near one extreme of its extent. This explicitly exploits one of the key advantages of the FCDI method: its ability to image sub-regions of extended objects. The complete geometry is outlined in Fig. 1, and allows the calculation of the Fresnel number, here NF ≈22 across the largest dimension of the object, which is comfortably higher than the empirical ideal of NF = 5 [24

H. M. Quiney, K. A. Nugent, and A. G. Peele, “Iterative image reconstruction algorithms using wave-front intensity and phase variation,” Opt. Lett. 30(13), 1638–1640 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].The high numerical aperture of the zone plate enables the specimen to be imaged at a spatial resolution of ~60 nm; the higher-angle diffraction data permits imaging at higher resolution [32

A. Thompson, D. Attwood, E. Gullikson, M. R. Howells, K. Kim, J. Kirz, J. Kortright, I. Lindau, P. Pianetta, and A. Robinson, “X-ray Data Booklet,” Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1–38 (2001).

].

2.3 Data assembly

The data were collected in a series of exposures to improve the measurement statistics. However, the measurement may still suffer from the effects of sample movement with respect to the focused beam. To mitigate this problem, 600 short (2.5 s) exposures, with the sample in the beam, were recorded and correlated with an arbitrary frame. Those frames with a correlation coefficient of higher than 0.992 were used to create a data set, the mean of 305 such individual frames, for the reconstruction. The “white-field” images (frames taken without the sample in the beam) and “black-field” images (frames taken with the beam off) do not suffer from these effects and a mean for each was calculated using 832 and 66 frames, respectively. The mean images of the diffraction data and white-field data are shown in Fig. 2 . The sample data in Figs. 2(a) and 2(b) shows both the holographic region (a) which yields a readily interpretable, lower resolution image of the object and the higher angle coherent diffraction data (b) which is exploited in an iterative reconstruction to access higher resolution information about the sample. The high degree of correlation between the frames used implies that radiation damage to the sample, at least at the resolutions we are sensitive to here, is not present in these measurements.

Fig. 2 Measured FCDI data. (a) In-line holographic region of the data. (b) The same data shown on a truncated and logarithmic intensity scale to highlight the coherent scattering from the pollen grain. (c) White field data, measured with the sample removed from the beam. (d) Detail of coherent scattering (also on a truncated, logarithmic scale).

2.4 Data reconstruction

The reconstruction was carried out in two steps. First, the white-field was constructed by attributing an ideal, parabolic phase curvature to the measured beam intensities. Then, the sample data were reconstructed for these beam parameters using 50 iterations of the FCDI algorithm [33

G. J. Williams, H. M. Quiney, A. G. Peele, and K. A. Nugent, “Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging: treatment and analysis of data,” New J. Phys. 12(3), 035020 (2010). [CrossRef]

], which utilized a shrink-wrap [34

S. Marchesini, H. He, H. N. Chapman, S. Hau-Riege, A. Noy, M. R. Howells, U. Weierstall, and J. C. H. Spence, “X-ray image reconstruction from a diffraction pattern alone,” Phys. Rev. B 68(14), 140101 (2003). [CrossRef]

] support-size reduction every ten iterations. This refines the support by taking the thus-far reconstructed image, convolving it with a five by five (5 × 5) pixel square and defining the new support by selecting the region that was above 5% of the maximum value of the resultant, convolved image. The reconstruction was repeated 20 times, each initialized with random phase seeds. An average ESW (corrected for the structure of the beam) was calculated from these reconstructions and is shown in Fig. 3(a) .

Fig. 3 (a) Reconstructed (amplitude) image of the pollen grain region with color bar. We interpret the higher density features in the body of the reconstruction (highlighted with white arrows “i”) as consistent with projections of surface protrusions. The pore (approximately 1 μm diameter) is indicated with a double-headed white arrow (“ii”). The intine/exine wall separation is also indicated with a white double-headed arrow (“iii”). The estimated separation in the FCDI reconstruction (1.0 μm) is broadly consistent with that measured in the EM image shown in (b; 1.4 μm). (b) An electron micrograph of the external wall of a pollen grain taken from the same batch as in (a), with the intine/exine wall separation and surface protrusions indicated with red arrows. The difference in contrast between the X-ray and EM images is attributed to the different preparation techniques used in each case, in particular the staining, dehydration steps and sectioning required for the TEM sample.

2.5 Transmission Electron Microscopy

Pollen grains isolated directly from the plant stamen, from the same sample batch used in the x-ray experiment, were rinsed with phosphate buffered saline and fixed with 2.5% glutaraldehyde in cacodylate buffer (pH 7.2) for 30 minutes. After fixation they were rinsed 5 times (5 min. each) with cacodylate buffer and stained with 1% osmium tetroxide for 40 minutes, then rinsed with water (4x), stained with 0.5% uranyl acetate for 40 minutes, and rinsed again with water (4x). All fixation and staining steps were performed on ice. The samples were then dehydrated in a series of ethanol and infiltrated with EPON (Carl Roth GmbH) and acetone in a series of steps (EPON/acetone 1:3 2hrs, 1:1 overnight, 3:1 3hrs, pure EPON 3x 30 min.). The resin blocks were polymerized by incubation in an oven at 60°C for 48 hours. Sections were cut 60 nm thick, placed on copper palladium slot grids coated with 1% Formvar (Sigma-Aldrich), and stained with uranyl acetate and lead citrate. Images were taken on a Philips CM120 Biotwin microscope.

3. Results and discussion

Figure 3(a) presents a reconstructed FCDI projection image through the pollen grain. We can identify features that give us confidence in the fidelity of the reconstruction. The most marked of these are the extine and intine walls of the pollen grain, seen at the edge of the grain. The distance between the extine and intine walls is consistent with that obtained by TEM as presented in Fig. 3(b) (average distance of 1.0 μm from the FCDI reconstruction and 1.4 μm from the TEM image). This variation is within expectations of the variation between individuals anticipated within this biological system. Several high-density features are also consistent with the scale of surface protrusions that are clearly visible in the EM image. In addition, the FCDI reconstruction shows a so-called 'aperture', the opening through the pollen wall into the grain cytoplasm, located near the tip of the grain (labeled with an arrow). These structures are common in pollen grains and are characterized by a reduction in density at a point in the pollen wall.

The holographic region of the data yields a lateral resolution of approximately 60 nm (defined by the focus of the zone-plate). The final, iteratively reconstructed image shown contains details finer than could be observed using the holographic region alone. This procedure can, in general, yield an improvement in resolution that is only limited by the wavelength and maximum angle at which the diffracted signal is detected.

4. Conclusions

In conclusion, we have shown a reconstructed image through part of a pollen grain using FCDI. We have observed features consistent with our expectations from electron microscopy and have demonstrated that FCDI is a viable method to image the internal structure of pollen grains.

Such measurements generalize readily to three dimensions through tomographic collection and processing of multiple angular projections [35

C. T. Putkunz, M. A. Pfeifer, A. G. Peele, G. J. Williams, H. M. Quiney, B. Abbey, K. A. Nugent, and I. McNulty, “Fresnel coherent diffraction tomography,” Opt. Express 18(11), 11746–11753 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. This is important for the investigation of biological specimens, where two-dimensional projection information alone may be insufficient to answer many questions. Future experiments, utilizing higher flux and cryo- preservation, would allow intact pollen grains to be imaged either without treatment, or under a variety of hydration conditions. Furthermore, nanoscale imaging by FCDI can be applicable to other biological specimens of similar dimensions.

Three-dimensional imaging of micrometer-sized biological structures is of increasing importance in modern cell biology, providing insights into the function of bio-machinery at sub-cellular dimensions. Combining FCDI with tomographic and cryo-preservation methodology has the potential to be the tool to provide precisely this information.

Acknowledgments

Part of this work was performed in the frame of BMBF Proposal 05K10CHG “Coherent Diffraction Imaging and Scattering of Ultrashort Coherent Pulses with Matter” in the framework of the German-Russian collaboration “Development and Use of Accelerator-Based Photon Sources”. Use of the Advanced Photon Source, an Office of Science User Facility operated for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science by Argonne National Laboratory, was supported by the U.S. DOE under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357. We also thank the Electron Microscopy Core Facility (EMCF) of EMBL-Heidelberg for providing technical support in this work.

References and links

1.

H. Breiteneder, K. Pettenburger, A. Bito, R. Valenta, D. Kraft, H. Rumpold, O. Scheiner, and M. Breitenbach, “The gene coding for the major birch pollen allergen Betv1, is highly homologous to a pea disease resistance response gene,” EMBO J. 8(7), 1935–1938 (1989). [PubMed]

2.

H. Breiteneder, F. Ferreira, K. Hoffmann-Sommergruber, C. Ebner, M. Breitenbach, H. Rumpold, D. Kraft, and O. Scheiner, “Four recombinant isoforms of Cor a I, the major allergen of hazel pollen, show different IgE-binding properties,” Eur. J. Biochem. 212(2), 355–362 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3.

R. J. Scott and A. D. Stead, eds., Molecular and Cellular Aspects of Plant Reproduction (Cambridge University Press, 1994).

4.

L. Belin and J. R. Rowley, “Demonstration of birch pollen allergen from isolated pollen grains using immunofluorescence and a single radial immunodiffusion technique,” Int. Arch. Allergy Appl. Immunol. 40(6), 754–769 (1971). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

5.

S. Vrtala, M. Grote, M. Duchêne, R. van Ree, D. Kraft, O. Scheiner, and R. Valenta, “Properties of tree and grass pollen allergens: reinvestigation of the linkage between solubility and allergenicity,” Int. Arch. Allergy Immunol. 102(2), 160–169 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

6.

M. Grote, “Ultrastructural morphology and allergen detection in birch pollen after aqueous, anhydrous-liquid, and vapor fixation techniques,” Microsc. Res. Tech. 21(3), 242–248 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7.

M. Grote, “In situ localization of pollen allergens by immunogold electron microscopy: allergens at unexpected sites,” Int. Arch. Allergy Immunol. 118(1), 1–6 (1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

8.

M. Grote, S. Vrtala, and R. Valenta, “Monitoring of two allergens, Bet v I and profilin, in dry and rehydrated birch pollen by immunogold electron microscopy and immunoblotting,” J. Histochem. Cytochem. 41(5), 745–750 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

9.

M. Takahashi, J. W. Nowicke, G. L. Webster, S. S. Orli, and S. Yankowski, “Pollen morphology, exine structure, and systematics of Acalyphoideae (Euphorbiaceae), part 3. Tribes Epiprineae (Epiprinus, Symphyllia, Adenochlaena, Cleidiocarpon, Koilodepas, Cladogynos, Cephalocrotonopsis, Cephalocroton, Cephalomappa), Adelieae (Adelia, Crotonogynopsis, Enriquebeltrania, Lasiocroton, Leucocroton), Alchorneae (Orfilea, Alchornea, Coelebogyne, Aparisthmium, Bocquillonia, Conceveiba, Gavarretia), Acalypheae pro parte (Ricinus, Adriana, Mercurialis, Leidesia, Dysopsis, Wetria, Cleidion, Sampantaea, Macaranga),” Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 110(1-2), 1–66 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

10.

L. Kovacik, J. M. Plitzko, M. Grote, and R. Reichelt, “Electron tomography of structures in the wall of hazel pollen grains,” J. Struct. Biol. 166(3), 263–271 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

11.

D. Y. Parkinson, G. McDermott, L. D. Etkin, M. A. Le Gros, and C. A. Larabell, “Quantitative 3-D imaging of eukaryotic cells using soft X-ray tomography,” J. Struct. Biol. 162(3), 380–386 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

12.

G. J. Williams, H. M. Quiney, B. B. Dhal, C. Q. Tran, K. A. Nugent, A. G. Peele, D. Paterson, and M. D. de Jonge, “Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97(2), 025506 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

13.

J. Miao, P. Charalambous, J. Kirz, and D. Sayre, “Extending the methodology of X-ray crystallography to allow imaging of micrometre-sized non-crystalline specimens,” Nature 400(6742), 342–344 (1999). [CrossRef]

14.

J. Miao, H. N. Chapman, J. Kirz, D. Sayre, and K. O. Hodgson, “Taking X-ray diffraction to the limit: macromolecular structures from femtosecond X-ray pulses and diffraction microscopy of cells with synchrotron radiation,” Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 33(1), 157–176 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15.

K. A. Nugent, “Coherent methods in the X-ray sciences,” Adv. Phys. 59(1), 1–99 (2010). [CrossRef]

16.

D. Shapiro, P. Thibault, T. Beetz, V. Elser, M. R. Howells, C. Jacobsen, J. Kirz, E. Lima, H. Miao, A. M. Neiman, and D. Sayre, “Biological imaging by soft x-ray diffraction microscopy,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102(43), 15343–15346 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

17.

J. Miao, K. O. Hodgson, T. Ishikawa, C. A. Larabell, M. A. LeGros, and Y. Nishino, “Imaging whole Escherichia coli bacteria by using single-particle x-ray diffraction,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 100(1), 110–112 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

18.

C. Song, H. Jiang, A. P. Mancuso, B. Amirbekian, L. Peng, R. Sun, S. S. Shah, Z. H. Zhou, T. Ishikawa, and J. Miao, “Quantitative imaging of single, unstained viruses with coherent x Rays,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 101(15), 158101 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

19.

X. Huang, J. Nelson, J. Kirz, E. Lima, S. Marchesini, H. Miao, A. M. Neiman, D. Shapiro, J. Steinbrener, A. Stewart, J. J. Turner, and C. Jacobsen, “Soft X-ray diffraction microscopy of a frozen hydrated yeast cell,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 103(19), 198101 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

20.

E. Lima, L. Wiegart, P. Pernot, M. Howells, J. Timmins, F. Zontone, and A. Madsen, “Cryogenic x-ray diffraction microscopy for biological samples,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 103(19), 198102 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

21.

Y. Nishino, Y. Takahashi, N. Imamoto, T. Ishikawa, and K. Maeshima, “Three-dimensional visualization of a human chromosome using coherent X-ray diffraction,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102(1), 018101 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

22.

A. P. Mancuso, T. Gorniak, F. Staier, O. M. Yefanov, R. Barth, C. Christophis, B. Reime, J. Gulden, A. Singer, M. E. Pettit, T. Nisius, T. Wilhein, C. Gutt, G. Grübel, N. Guerassimova, R. Treusch, J. Feldhaus, S. Eisebitt, E. Weckert, M. Grunze, A. Rosenhahn, and I. A. Vartanyants, “Coherent imaging of biological samples with femtosecond pulses at the free-electron laser FLASH,” New J. Phys. 12(3), 035003 (2010). [CrossRef]

23.

A. P. Mancuso, O. M. Yefanov, and I. A. Vartanyants, “Coherent diffractive imaging of biological samples at synchrotron and free electron laser facilities,” J. Biotechnol. 149(4), 229–237 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

24.

H. M. Quiney, K. A. Nugent, and A. G. Peele, “Iterative image reconstruction algorithms using wave-front intensity and phase variation,” Opt. Lett. 30(13), 1638–1640 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

25.

J. M. Rodenburg, A. C. Hurst, A. G. Cullis, B. R. Dobson, F. Pfeiffer, O. Bunk, C. David, K. Jefimovs, and I. Johnson, “Hard-X-Ray Lensless Imaging of Extended Objects,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98(3), 034801 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

26.

P. Thibault, M. Dierolf, A. Menzel, O. Bunk, C. David, and F. Pfeiffer, “High-resolution scanning x-ray diffraction microscopy,” Science 321(5887), 379–382 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

27.

K. Giewekemeyer, P. Thibault, S. Kalbfleisch, A. Beerlink, C. M. Kewish, M. Dierolf, F. Pfeiffer, and T. Salditt, “Quantitative biological imaging by ptychographic x-ray diffraction microscopy,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 107(2), 529–534 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

28.

G. J. Williams, E. Hanssen, A. G. Peele, M. A. Pfeifer, J. Clark, B. Abbey, G. Cadenazzi, M. D. de Jonge, S. Vogt, L. Tilley, and K. A. Nugent, “High-resolution X-ray imaging of Plasmodium falciparum-infected red blood cells,” Cytometry A 73(10), 949–957 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

29.

D. J. Vine, G. J. Williams, B. Abbey, M. A. Pfeifer, J. N. Clark, M. D. De Jonge, I. McNulty, A. G. Peele, and K. A. Nugent, “Ptychographic Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging,” Phys. Rev. A 80(6), 063823 (2009). [CrossRef]

30.

I. McNulty, A. Khounsary, Y. P. Feng, Y. Qian, J. Barraza, C. Benson, and D. Shu, “A beamline for 1–4 keV microscopy and coherence experiments at the Advanced Photon Source,” Rev. Sci. Instrum. 67(9), 3372 (1996). [CrossRef]

31.

D. J. Vine, G. J. Williams, J. N. Clark, C. T. Putkunz, M. A. Pfeifer, D. Legnini, C. Roehrig, E. Wrobel, E. Huwald, G. van Riessen, B. Abbey, T. Beetz, J. Irwin, M. Feser, B. Hornberger, I. McNulty, K. A. Nugent, and A. G. Peele, “An in-vacuum x-ray diffraction microscope for use in the 0.7-2.9 keV range,” Rev. Sci. Instrum. 83(3), 033703 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

32.

A. Thompson, D. Attwood, E. Gullikson, M. R. Howells, K. Kim, J. Kirz, J. Kortright, I. Lindau, P. Pianetta, and A. Robinson, “X-ray Data Booklet,” Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1–38 (2001).

33.

G. J. Williams, H. M. Quiney, A. G. Peele, and K. A. Nugent, “Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging: treatment and analysis of data,” New J. Phys. 12(3), 035020 (2010). [CrossRef]

34.

S. Marchesini, H. He, H. N. Chapman, S. Hau-Riege, A. Noy, M. R. Howells, U. Weierstall, and J. C. H. Spence, “X-ray image reconstruction from a diffraction pattern alone,” Phys. Rev. B 68(14), 140101 (2003). [CrossRef]

35.

C. T. Putkunz, M. A. Pfeifer, A. G. Peele, G. J. Williams, H. M. Quiney, B. Abbey, K. A. Nugent, and I. McNulty, “Fresnel coherent diffraction tomography,” Opt. Express 18(11), 11746–11753 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

OCIS Codes
(000.4920) General : Other life sciences
(340.7440) X-ray optics : X-ray imaging
(340.7460) X-ray optics : X-ray microscopy

ToC Category:
X-ray Optics

History
Original Manuscript: September 10, 2012
Revised Manuscript: October 27, 2012
Manuscript Accepted: October 28, 2012
Published: November 13, 2012

Virtual Issues
Vol. 7, Iss. 12 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Citation
Adrian P. Mancuso, Matthew R. Groves, Oleg E. Polozhentsev, Garth J. Williams, Ian McNulty, Claude Antony, Rachel Santarella-Mellwig, Aleksander V. Soldatov, Victor Lamzin, Andrew G. Peele, Keith A. Nugent, and Ivan A. Vartanyants, "Internal structure of an intact Convallaria majalis pollen grain observed with X-ray Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging," Opt. Express 20, 26778-26785 (2012)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/vjbo/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-20-24-26778


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. H. Breiteneder, K. Pettenburger, A. Bito, R. Valenta, D. Kraft, H. Rumpold, O. Scheiner, and M. Breitenbach, “The gene coding for the major birch pollen allergen Betv1, is highly homologous to a pea disease resistance response gene,” EMBO J.8(7), 1935–1938 (1989). [PubMed]
  2. H. Breiteneder, F. Ferreira, K. Hoffmann-Sommergruber, C. Ebner, M. Breitenbach, H. Rumpold, D. Kraft, and O. Scheiner, “Four recombinant isoforms of Cor a I, the major allergen of hazel pollen, show different IgE-binding properties,” Eur. J. Biochem.212(2), 355–362 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. R. J. Scott and A. D. Stead, eds., Molecular and Cellular Aspects of Plant Reproduction (Cambridge University Press, 1994).
  4. L. Belin and J. R. Rowley, “Demonstration of birch pollen allergen from isolated pollen grains using immunofluorescence and a single radial immunodiffusion technique,” Int. Arch. Allergy Appl. Immunol.40(6), 754–769 (1971). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. S. Vrtala, M. Grote, M. Duchêne, R. van Ree, D. Kraft, O. Scheiner, and R. Valenta, “Properties of tree and grass pollen allergens: reinvestigation of the linkage between solubility and allergenicity,” Int. Arch. Allergy Immunol.102(2), 160–169 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. M. Grote, “Ultrastructural morphology and allergen detection in birch pollen after aqueous, anhydrous-liquid, and vapor fixation techniques,” Microsc. Res. Tech.21(3), 242–248 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. M. Grote, “In situ localization of pollen allergens by immunogold electron microscopy: allergens at unexpected sites,” Int. Arch. Allergy Immunol.118(1), 1–6 (1999). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. M. Grote, S. Vrtala, and R. Valenta, “Monitoring of two allergens, Bet v I and profilin, in dry and rehydrated birch pollen by immunogold electron microscopy and immunoblotting,” J. Histochem. Cytochem.41(5), 745–750 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. M. Takahashi, J. W. Nowicke, G. L. Webster, S. S. Orli, and S. Yankowski, “Pollen morphology, exine structure, and systematics of Acalyphoideae (Euphorbiaceae), part 3. Tribes Epiprineae (Epiprinus, Symphyllia, Adenochlaena, Cleidiocarpon, Koilodepas, Cladogynos, Cephalocrotonopsis, Cephalocroton, Cephalomappa), Adelieae (Adelia, Crotonogynopsis, Enriquebeltrania, Lasiocroton, Leucocroton), Alchorneae (Orfilea, Alchornea, Coelebogyne, Aparisthmium, Bocquillonia, Conceveiba, Gavarretia), Acalypheae pro parte (Ricinus, Adriana, Mercurialis, Leidesia, Dysopsis, Wetria, Cleidion, Sampantaea, Macaranga),” Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol.110(1-2), 1–66 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. L. Kovacik, J. M. Plitzko, M. Grote, and R. Reichelt, “Electron tomography of structures in the wall of hazel pollen grains,” J. Struct. Biol.166(3), 263–271 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. D. Y. Parkinson, G. McDermott, L. D. Etkin, M. A. Le Gros, and C. A. Larabell, “Quantitative 3-D imaging of eukaryotic cells using soft X-ray tomography,” J. Struct. Biol.162(3), 380–386 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. G. J. Williams, H. M. Quiney, B. B. Dhal, C. Q. Tran, K. A. Nugent, A. G. Peele, D. Paterson, and M. D. de Jonge, “Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging,” Phys. Rev. Lett.97(2), 025506 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. J. Miao, P. Charalambous, J. Kirz, and D. Sayre, “Extending the methodology of X-ray crystallography to allow imaging of micrometre-sized non-crystalline specimens,” Nature400(6742), 342–344 (1999). [CrossRef]
  14. J. Miao, H. N. Chapman, J. Kirz, D. Sayre, and K. O. Hodgson, “Taking X-ray diffraction to the limit: macromolecular structures from femtosecond X-ray pulses and diffraction microscopy of cells with synchrotron radiation,” Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct.33(1), 157–176 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. K. A. Nugent, “Coherent methods in the X-ray sciences,” Adv. Phys.59(1), 1–99 (2010). [CrossRef]
  16. D. Shapiro, P. Thibault, T. Beetz, V. Elser, M. R. Howells, C. Jacobsen, J. Kirz, E. Lima, H. Miao, A. M. Neiman, and D. Sayre, “Biological imaging by soft x-ray diffraction microscopy,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.102(43), 15343–15346 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. J. Miao, K. O. Hodgson, T. Ishikawa, C. A. Larabell, M. A. LeGros, and Y. Nishino, “Imaging whole Escherichia coli bacteria by using single-particle x-ray diffraction,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.100(1), 110–112 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. C. Song, H. Jiang, A. P. Mancuso, B. Amirbekian, L. Peng, R. Sun, S. S. Shah, Z. H. Zhou, T. Ishikawa, and J. Miao, “Quantitative imaging of single, unstained viruses with coherent x Rays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.101(15), 158101 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. X. Huang, J. Nelson, J. Kirz, E. Lima, S. Marchesini, H. Miao, A. M. Neiman, D. Shapiro, J. Steinbrener, A. Stewart, J. J. Turner, and C. Jacobsen, “Soft X-ray diffraction microscopy of a frozen hydrated yeast cell,” Phys. Rev. Lett.103(19), 198101 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. E. Lima, L. Wiegart, P. Pernot, M. Howells, J. Timmins, F. Zontone, and A. Madsen, “Cryogenic x-ray diffraction microscopy for biological samples,” Phys. Rev. Lett.103(19), 198102 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Y. Nishino, Y. Takahashi, N. Imamoto, T. Ishikawa, and K. Maeshima, “Three-dimensional visualization of a human chromosome using coherent X-ray diffraction,” Phys. Rev. Lett.102(1), 018101 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. A. P. Mancuso, T. Gorniak, F. Staier, O. M. Yefanov, R. Barth, C. Christophis, B. Reime, J. Gulden, A. Singer, M. E. Pettit, T. Nisius, T. Wilhein, C. Gutt, G. Grübel, N. Guerassimova, R. Treusch, J. Feldhaus, S. Eisebitt, E. Weckert, M. Grunze, A. Rosenhahn, and I. A. Vartanyants, “Coherent imaging of biological samples with femtosecond pulses at the free-electron laser FLASH,” New J. Phys.12(3), 035003 (2010). [CrossRef]
  23. A. P. Mancuso, O. M. Yefanov, and I. A. Vartanyants, “Coherent diffractive imaging of biological samples at synchrotron and free electron laser facilities,” J. Biotechnol.149(4), 229–237 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. H. M. Quiney, K. A. Nugent, and A. G. Peele, “Iterative image reconstruction algorithms using wave-front intensity and phase variation,” Opt. Lett.30(13), 1638–1640 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. J. M. Rodenburg, A. C. Hurst, A. G. Cullis, B. R. Dobson, F. Pfeiffer, O. Bunk, C. David, K. Jefimovs, and I. Johnson, “Hard-X-Ray Lensless Imaging of Extended Objects,” Phys. Rev. Lett.98(3), 034801 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. P. Thibault, M. Dierolf, A. Menzel, O. Bunk, C. David, and F. Pfeiffer, “High-resolution scanning x-ray diffraction microscopy,” Science321(5887), 379–382 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. K. Giewekemeyer, P. Thibault, S. Kalbfleisch, A. Beerlink, C. M. Kewish, M. Dierolf, F. Pfeiffer, and T. Salditt, “Quantitative biological imaging by ptychographic x-ray diffraction microscopy,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.107(2), 529–534 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. G. J. Williams, E. Hanssen, A. G. Peele, M. A. Pfeifer, J. Clark, B. Abbey, G. Cadenazzi, M. D. de Jonge, S. Vogt, L. Tilley, and K. A. Nugent, “High-resolution X-ray imaging of Plasmodium falciparum-infected red blood cells,” Cytometry A73(10), 949–957 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. D. J. Vine, G. J. Williams, B. Abbey, M. A. Pfeifer, J. N. Clark, M. D. De Jonge, I. McNulty, A. G. Peele, and K. A. Nugent, “Ptychographic Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging,” Phys. Rev. A80(6), 063823 (2009). [CrossRef]
  30. I. McNulty, A. Khounsary, Y. P. Feng, Y. Qian, J. Barraza, C. Benson, and D. Shu, “A beamline for 1–4 keV microscopy and coherence experiments at the Advanced Photon Source,” Rev. Sci. Instrum.67(9), 3372 (1996). [CrossRef]
  31. D. J. Vine, G. J. Williams, J. N. Clark, C. T. Putkunz, M. A. Pfeifer, D. Legnini, C. Roehrig, E. Wrobel, E. Huwald, G. van Riessen, B. Abbey, T. Beetz, J. Irwin, M. Feser, B. Hornberger, I. McNulty, K. A. Nugent, and A. G. Peele, “An in-vacuum x-ray diffraction microscope for use in the 0.7-2.9 keV range,” Rev. Sci. Instrum.83(3), 033703 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. A. Thompson, D. Attwood, E. Gullikson, M. R. Howells, K. Kim, J. Kirz, J. Kortright, I. Lindau, P. Pianetta, and A. Robinson, “X-ray Data Booklet,” Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1–38 (2001).
  33. G. J. Williams, H. M. Quiney, A. G. Peele, and K. A. Nugent, “Fresnel coherent diffractive imaging: treatment and analysis of data,” New J. Phys.12(3), 035020 (2010). [CrossRef]
  34. S. Marchesini, H. He, H. N. Chapman, S. Hau-Riege, A. Noy, M. R. Howells, U. Weierstall, and J. C. H. Spence, “X-ray image reconstruction from a diffraction pattern alone,” Phys. Rev. B68(14), 140101 (2003). [CrossRef]
  35. C. T. Putkunz, M. A. Pfeifer, A. G. Peele, G. J. Williams, H. M. Quiney, B. Abbey, K. A. Nugent, and I. McNulty, “Fresnel coherent diffraction tomography,” Opt. Express18(11), 11746–11753 (2010). [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.

Figures

Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3
 

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited