4.5 Review

Invited Review Article: Pump-probe microscopy

期刊

REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS
卷 87, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/1.4943211

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01CA166555, F32CA168497, F32CA183204]
  2. Center for In-Vivo Microscopy [P41EB015897]
  3. National Science Foundation Division of Chemistry [1309017]
  4. Division Of Chemistry
  5. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1309017] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multiphoton microscopy has rapidly gained popularity in biomedical imaging and materials science because of its ability to provide three-dimensional images at high spatial and temporal resolution even in optically scattering environments. Currently the majority of commercial and home-built devices are based on two-photon fluorescence and harmonic generation contrast. These two contrast mechanisms are relatively easy to measure but can access only a limited range of endogenous targets. Recent developments in fast laser pulse generation, pulse shaping, and detection technology have made accessible a wide range of optical contrasts that utilize multiple pulses of different colors. Molecular excitation with multiple pulses offers a large number of adjustable parameters. For example, in two-pulse pump-probe microscopy, one can vary the wavelength of each excitation pulse, the detection wavelength, the timing between the excitation pulses, and the detection gating window after excitation. Such a large parameter space can provide much greater molecular specificity than existing single-color techniques and allow for structural and functional imaging without the need for exogenous dyes and labels, which might interfere with the system under study. In this review, we provide a tutorial overview, covering principles of pump-probe microscopy and experimental setup, challenges associated with signal detection and data processing, and an overview of applications. (C) 2016 AIP Publishing LLC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据