Deconvolution Fluorescence Light Microscopy

Abstract

Deconvolution microscopy is a computational technique that deblurs fluorescence images using knowledge of the optical path of the microscope.

Keywords: deconvolution; light microscopy; point spread function; three‐dimensional imaging; image restoration

Figure 1.

Microscopic imaging as a convolution. (a) Fluorescent beads (0.1 μm) were dried onto a coverslip and imaged using a fluorescence microscope, a 63×/1.4 lens and a CCD camera. (b) The same field as in (a) except that the position of the focal plane is shifted 1 μm. The distribution of light around each bead is identical, although the total intensity differs depending on the amount of fluorophore in each bead. This image is generated by the convolution of the PSF of the objective lenses with each bead. (c) An axial view of a PSF of a 100×/1.4 lens collected by recording a series of optical sections at 0.1‐μm intervals through a single 0.1‐μm bead. The vertical axis of the image is parallel to the optical axis of the microscope.

Figure 2.

Normalization of illumination intensity variations. (a) Axial view of three‐dimensional data set of a Drosophila embryonic nucleus stained with DAPI, a fluorescent DNA‐binding dye. Optical axis and direction of focus change is in the vertical direction. Note the systematic variations in fluorescence intensity at specific optical sections indicated by arrows. (b) As in (a), after restoration, using constrained, iterative deconvolution with an empirical PSF. Deconvolution has enhanced the variations in intensity due to lamp flicker that occurred during data collection. (c) After sampling of total excitation flux during each exposure and normalization of flux differences, systematic intensity variations are corrected. (d) As in (c), after restoration constrained, iterative deconvolution using an empirical PSF. Systematic intensity variations have been removed by measurement and normalization of excitation intensity and the resulting image gives a better representation of the chromosomal structure.

close

References

Agard DA, Hiraoka Y, Shaw P and Sedat JW (1989) Fluorescence microscopy in three dimensions. Methods in Cell Biology 30: 353–377.

Bracewell RN (1986) The Fourier Transform and its Applications. New York: McGraw‐Hill.

Carrington W (1990) Image restoration in 3D microscopy with limited data. Proceedings of SPIE – the International Society for Optical Engineering 1205: 72–83.

Castleman KR (1979) Digital Image Processing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall.

Fay FS, Carrington W and Fogarty KE (1989) Three‐dimensional molecular distribution in single cells analysed using the digital imaging microscope. Journal of Microscopy 153(part 2): 133–149.

Hiraoka Y, Sedat JW and Agard DA (1990) Determination of three‐dimensional imaging properties of a light microscope system. Biophysical Journal 57(2): 325–333.

Holmes TJ (1992) Blind deconvolution of quantum‐limited imagery: maximum likelihood approach. Journal of the Optical Society of America Part A 9(7): 1052–1061.

Kam Z, Jones MO, Chen H, Agard DA and Sedat JW (1993) Design and construction of an optimal illumination system for quantitative wide‐field multi‐dimensional microscopy. Bioimaging 1: 71–81.

Swedlow JR, Sedat JW and Agard DA (1997) Deconvolution in optical microscopy. In: Jansson PA (ed.) Deconvolution of Images and Spectra. New York: Academic Press.

Further Reading

Inoue S and Spring KR (1997) Video Microscopy, 2nd edn. New York: Plenum.

Jansson PA (1997) Deconvolution of Images and Spectra, 2nd edn. San Diego: Academic Press.

Pawley JB (1990) Handbook of Confocal Microscopy, 2nd edn. New York: Plenum.

Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

How to Cite close
Swedlow, Jason R(Mar 2002) Deconvolution Fluorescence Light Microscopy. In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. http://www.els.net [doi: 10.1038/npg.els.0002992]