4.6 Article

Low-signal limit of X-ray single particle diffractive imaging

Journal

OPTICS EXPRESS
Volume 27, Issue 26, Pages 37816-37833

Publisher

OPTICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1364/OE.27.037816

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Basic Energy Sciences [DE-AC02-76SF00515]
  2. National Science Foundation BioXFEL award [STC-1231306]
  3. Helmholtz Association
  4. Australian Research Council
  5. European Research Council [ERC-2013-SyG 609920]
  6. Human Frontier Science Program [RGP0010/2017]
  7. Exzellenzclusters Entzundungsforschung [EXC 2056, 390715994]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An outstanding question in X-ray single particle imaging experiments has been the feasibility of imaging sub 10-nm-sized biomolecules under realistic experimental conditions where very few photons are expected to be measured in a single snapshot and instrument background may be significant relative to particle scattering. While analyses of simulated data have shown that the determination of an average image should be feasible using Bayesian methods such as the EMC algorithm, this has yet to be demonstrated using experimental data containing realistic non-isotropic instrument background, sample variability and other experimental factors. In this work, we show that the orientation and phase retrieval steps work at photon counts diluted to the signal levels one expects from smaller molecules or with weaker pulses, using data from experimental measurements of 60-nm PR772 viruses. Even when the signal is reduced to a fraction as little as 1/256, the virus electron density determined using ab initio phasing is of almost the same quality as the high-signal data. However, we are still limited by the total number of patterns collected, which may soon be mitigated by the advent of high repetition-rate sources like the European XFEL and LCLS-II. Published by The Optical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available