Scanning microdensitometry of objects small relative to the wavelength of light
- PMID: 7130668
- DOI: 10.1177/30.10.7130668
Scanning microdensitometry of objects small relative to the wavelength of light
Abstract
Diffraction effects may have to be taken into account in microdensitometry when dealing with relatively dark specimens even an order of magnitude larger than the wavelength of light, and become progressively more important with smaller objects. According to geometrical optical theory, when scanning across the straight edge of a uniformly absorbing, semi-infinite object the distribution error per scan line is directly proportional to the diameter of the measuring-spot. Diffraction theory predicts similar results for measuring-spots larger than about 3 times the wavelength of light, but a significant error per scan line with very small or even infinitesimal measuring-spots. Diffraction theory further indicates that point absorbance measurements can be 95 + % accurate in the centers of 6.25, 2.5, and 2.0 microns diameter disks with absorbances respectively up to about 1.0, 0.39, and 0.25, but that this accuracy is unattainable with any object less than 1.25 microns in diameter. Scanning, integrating absorbance measurements are of somewhat lower accuracy than central point measurements with relatively large objects, e.g., they are only about 89% accurate with a 6 micron diameter object of absorbance 1.0. With very small objects, diffraction theory shows distribution error to be almost independent of the size of the scanning spot, and with an object of less than about 0.125 micron diameter the apparent integrated absorbance predicted by diffraction theory is effectively identical with that predicted by geometrical theory for an infinitesimal object scanned with a finite measuring-spot, i.e., it is the product of the object area and 0.4343 (1-It), where It is the true transmission. Scanning microdensitometry of objects of very low true absorbance is effectively free from distribution error. In practice, distribution error can be reduced by using an off-peak wavelength, by reducing the area illuminated, and by routine measurement and offsetting of apparent glare (some of which is actually due to diffraction). Little or nothing is to be gained by using a measuring-spot smaller than about one-quarter the wavelength of light.
Similar articles
-
Optical errors in scanning stage absorbance cytophotometry. II. Application of correction factors for residual distributional error, glare and diffraction error in practical cytophotometry.J Histochem Cytochem. 1980 May;28(5):395-400. doi: 10.1177/28.5.6991590. J Histochem Cytochem. 1980. PMID: 6991590
-
Errors in microdensitometry.Histochem J. 1981 Mar;13(2):251-67. doi: 10.1007/BF01006883. Histochem J. 1981. PMID: 6166593 Review.
-
Apparent anomalies in nuclear feulgen-DNA contents. Role of systematic microdensitometric errors.J Cell Biol. 1976 Oct;71(1):68-88. doi: 10.1083/jcb.71.1.68. J Cell Biol. 1976. PMID: 61968 Free PMC article.
-
Aspects of scanning microdensitometry. III. The monochromator system.J Microsc. 1975 Sep;105(1):33-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2818.1975.tb04035.x. J Microsc. 1975. PMID: 1243150
-
Estimation of accuracy of optical measuring systems with respect to object distance.Opt Express. 2011 Jul 18;19(15):14300-14. doi: 10.1364/OE.19.014300. Opt Express. 2011. PMID: 21934794
Cited by
-
A user's guide for avoiding errors in absorbance image cytometry: a review with original experimental observations.Histochem J. 1994 Jan;26(1):1-19. Histochem J. 1994. PMID: 7513318 Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources