Microscopy Artifacts
Microscopy Artifacts - Related Videos
06:42
A Multi-hole Cryovial Eliminates Freezing Artifacts when Muscle Tissues are Directly Immersed in Liquid Nitrogen
0 Views •
Cited by 9 •
2017
This protocol describes a procedure to freeze muscle tissues by plunging them directly into liquid nitrogen. This protocol also highlights a new cryovial that can avoid the "blanket effect" of nitrogen gas when liquid nitrogen contacts the tissue surface of a specimen.
08:57
Focussed Ion Beam Milling and Scanning Electron Microscopy of Brain Tissue
0 Views •
Cited by 105 •
2011
This protocol describes how resin embedded brain tissue can be prepared and imaged in the three dimensions in the focussed ion beam, scanning electron microscope.
06:49
Quantitative Visualization of Leukocyte Infiltrate in a Murine Model of Fulminant Myocarditis by Light Sheet Microscopy
0 Views •
Cited by 3 •
2017
Here, we describe a light-sheet microscopy approach to visualize the cardiac CD45+ leukocyte infiltrate in a murine model of aseptic fulminant myocarditis, which is induced by the intratracheal diphtheria toxin treatment of CD11c.DTR mice.
10:23
Equipment Setup and Artifact Removal for Simultaneous Electroencephalogram and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Clinical Review in Epilepsy
0 Views •
Cited by 1 •
2023
This article details simultaneous electroencephalogram and functional magnetic resonance imaging (EEG-fMRI) recording procedures that can be used in both clinical and research settings. EEG processing procedures to remove imaging artifacts for clinical review are also included. This study focuses on the example of epilepsy during the interictal period.
11:16
Correlative Light- and Electron Microscopy Using Quantum Dot Nanoparticles
0 Views •
Cited by 12 •
2016
A method is described whereby quantum dot (QD) nanoparticles can be used for correlative immunocytochemical studies of epoxy embedded human pathology tissue. We employ commercial antibody fragment conjugated QDs that are visualized by widefield fluorescence light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy.
FAQs
Researchers compare the feature with the known effects of preparation, optics, instrument settings, and image processing. Folds or uneven backgrounds may indicate preparation-related distortion, while blur, halos, or altered fluorescence can reflect imaging conditions or processing. This distinction matters because interpreting every visible structure as biological can lead to inaccurate observations and measurements.
Preparation steps can alter specimen shape and appearance before imaging begins. Fixation, dehydration, or sectioning may introduce distortions that appear as folds or changes in tissue structure, making the image differ from the original sample. Recognizing these effects helps researchers avoid treating preparation-induced geometry as genuine cellular or tissue organization.
Optical limitations and instrument settings can change focus, contrast, illumination, and fluorescence in ways that obscure or exaggerate sample features. Blur may reduce structural detail, while uneven illumination or halos can create apparent boundaries that are not biological. Optimizing imaging conditions helps preserve interpretable signal and supports more reliable comparisons between images.
Image processing can modify contrast or fluorescence patterns and produce signal that appears to belong to the specimen. Such changes may be especially misleading when researchers assess faint structures or compare intensity across regions. Controls and complementary microscopy methods provide ways to evaluate whether an observed signal persists independently of a particular processing step or imaging approach.
A reliable workflow begins with careful specimen preparation, followed by optimized illumination, focus, detector sampling, and other imaging conditions. Researchers should also apply suitable controls and review whether processing changes the observed pattern. Combining these measures reduces distortions in shape, contrast, focus, and fluorescence, improving image quality and the reproducibility of biological observations.
Controls help separate effects caused by preparation, imaging, or processing from features associated with the sample. Researchers can examine whether unusual backgrounds, blur, halos, or apparent fluorescence remain under controlled conditions or with a complementary microscopy method. These comparisons strengthen interpretation by showing whether an observation is robust rather than technique-specific.
Artifacts can change apparent shape, contrast, focus, or fluorescence, so they may bias measurements of cellular and tissue structures. In biology, recognizing these distortions is essential before drawing conclusions from image-based observations. Optimized conditions, careful controls, and complementary methods improve measurement accuracy and make results more reproducible across experiments.