$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
1. Critical steps and troubleshooting for the data acquisition
The typical imaging settings for a GFP and RFP expressing sample can be found in Table 3. In the described microscope setup the light sheet is static, formed by a cylindrical lens. The two illumination objectives are air lenses and the detection objective is a water-dipping lens. Zoom 1.0 with 20X/1.0 or 40X/1.0 objectives gives 230 nm and 115 nm pixel size and a field of view of 441 x 441 µm or 221 x 221 µm respectively. It is recommended to use the default light sheet thickness with center to border ratio 1:2. For 20X/1.0 this thickness corresponds to 4.5 µm and for 40X/1.0 to 3.2 µm in the center. If imaging speed is not the primary priority, use separate tracks in case of a multicolor sample to avoid the crosstalk of fluorescence emission between the channels. The highest speed of acquisition is limited to 50 msec per z step by the speed of movement of the z-driver. If the goal is to achieve the maximum imaging speed in case of, e.g., two tracks with dual sided illumination, the exposure time must be set so that the sum of all the images taken per z step is below 50 msec. On the other hand, if only a single image is acquired per z step, it is not beneficial to set the exposure time shorter than 50 msec.
| 1920 x 1920 image size |
| 16-bit |
| Pivot scan on |
| Dual sided illumination with online fusion |
| 10X/0.2 illumination objective |
| 20X/1.0 W Plan-Apochromat detection objective |
| Track 1: Excitation 488 nm typically 2% of 100 mW laser, 550 nm SP emission filter |
| Track 2: Excitation 561 nm typically 3% of 75 mW laser, 585 nm LP emission filter |
| Exposure time up to 100 msec |
| Z stack thickness 50-100 μm |
| 1-1.5 μm z step size in the continuous z drive mode |
| Incubation at 28.5 °C |
Table 3: Imaging Settings.
Inspecting the sample after the experiment
It is important to ensure that the specimen is still healthy at the end of the experiment. As a first readout, check the heartbeat of the specimen under a stereoscope. With a pair of sharp forceps the sample can be taken out of the agarose and moved to the incubator to develop further in order to check if it was affected by the imaging. Alternatively, it can be fixed for antibody staining.
Mounting and drift
It is essential to keep the osmolarity of the chamber solution close to the osmolarity of the embedding agarose, otherwise swelling/shrinking of the agarose and subsequent instability of the sample will occur. Therefore, use the same solution (E3 medium without methylene blue) to fill the chamber and to prepare the 1% low melting point agarose aliquots. Additionally, do not leave the agarose in the 70 °C heating block for more than 2 hr, as it can lose its gelling properties.
Do not embed the fish into too hot agarose, as this can lead to heat shock response or death of the embryo. If unsure about the effect of warm agarose on the embryos, check that the tail does not bend and that the heart rate does not slow down. If this occurs, use a different embryo for the experiment.
Keep the overall length of the agarose column with the sample short (around 2 cm) and mount the zebrafish with its head oriented towards the plunger tip. Likewise, the agarose cylinder extruded from the capillary should be kept as short as possible. These measures will ensure stability of the sample throughout the movie. At the same time, the agarose column must be long enough so that the glass capillary itself does not reach into the light path, as this would cause major refraction and reflection.
The initial drift of the sample is caused by the volume changes of the agarose cylinder itself. Sliding of the plunger is not the reason for it. Therefore, it does not help to fix the plunger with plasticine or nail polish. The embryo might change its position during the movie due to its natural growth too. Accordingly, it is advisable to center the region of interest in the middle of the field of view and keep some room at the edges to accommodate these movements.
Reduced amount of embedding medium in the light path
Orienting the sample correctly helps to achieve the best possible image quality15. Generally, excitation and emission light should travel through as little tissue and mounting media as possible. The optimal solution is agarose-free mounting. This was achieved for example in a setup for Arabidopsis lateral root imaging14, in which the main root was mounted into phytagel and the lateral roots were subsequently let to grow out of the gel column completely. Agarose-free mounting was also developed for imaging of the complete embryogenesis of Tribolium beetle over two days12. Image quality improvement was not a primary motivation in that case. Tribolium embryos simply do not survive inside the agarose long enough. An absolutely embedding media-free mounting has not been achieved for long term imaging in zebrafish. Still, we can take advantage of the fact that when the agarose solidifies, most embryos are positioned diagonally in the capillary with one eye located deep in the agarose and the second eye being close to the surface of the embedding column. The eye closer to the surface provides superior image quality and therefore should be imaged preferentially.
Agarose concentration and long-term imaging
The concentration of agarose for mounting is a compromise between stability of the sample and the possibility to accommodate growth of the embryo and diffusion of oxygen to it. There is no additional gain in the stability of the sample when using agarose concentrations higher than 1%. As a starting point for optimizing the experiments we recommend 0.6% agarose, which is also suitable for embryos younger than 24 hpf that are too delicate to be mounted into 1% agarose. To anaesthetize older embryos and larvae, the MS-222 concentration can be raised to 200 µg/ml without side effects13.
In case developing embryos are imaged for longer than ±12 hr, agarose mounting is not recommended, because it restricts the growth of the embryo and causes tail deformation. This issue was solved for zebrafish by mounting embryos into FEP polymer tubes with refractive index similar to water13,39. Mouse embryos, on the other hand, can be immobilized in hollow agarose cylinders40 or in holes of an acrylic rod attached to a syringe41. FEP tube mounting is not recommended as default method though, because the wall of the tube refracts the light slightly more than agarose.
Light sheet alignment
For good image quality it is critical to perform the automatic light sheet alignment before every experiment. Especially if the zoom settings were changed, the objectives were taken out, or a different liquid was used in the chamber.
Illumination
The pivot scanning of the light sheet should always be activated. For large scattering specimens, it is necessary to apply the dual sided illumination with online fusion to achieve even illumination across the field of view. Dual sided illumination also diminishes a specific problem of the eye imaging, which is the refraction of the incoming light sheet by the lens of the embryo. Smaller, less scattering specimens can be efficiently imaged using single sided illumination, which shortens the imaging time by half and can result in slightly better image quality compared to dual sided illumination. This is because the light paths for the two illumination arms are always different and the more efficient one can be chosen. Additionally, the two light sheets coming from each side are never perfectly in one plane, which causes mild blurring after the fusion. For very fast intracellular events, like the growing microtubules (Movie 2), the dual sided illumination is not appropriate, since the images with illumination from left and right are acquired sequentially, which could result in motion blur.
Photobleaching and phototoxicity
Less fluorophore photobleaching is often mentioned as a major advantage of the LSFM. We would argue that the aim should be no photobleaching at all. If there is noticeable photobleaching in the live imaging experiment, the specimen is probably already out of its physiological range of tolerated laser exposure. When imaging the zebrafish embryos in the spinning disc microscope, in our experience, high phototoxicity can stall embryo development even before the fluorescent signal bleaches markedly. Therefore, the imaging settings in the LSFM should be adjusted so that little or no photobleaching is observed. Even though LSFM is gentle to the sample, it is prudent to use only as much laser power and exposure time as needed to achieve a signal to noise ratio sufficient for the subsequent data analysis.
Z-stack, time intervals and data size
The files generated by LSFM are usually very large; sometimes in the terabyte range. It is often necessary to make a compromise between image quality and data size. This is particularly the case for z spacing of stacks and intervals in the time-lapse acquisitions. To define the z intervals, the Optimal button in the Z-stack tool tab should ideally be used, especially if the dataset will be deconvolved later. It calculates the spacing to achieve 50% overlap between neighboring optical slices. Still, somewhat larger z intervals are usually acceptable. They reduce the time needed to acquire the z stack as well as the final file size. The optimal time sampling depends on the process of interest. For overall eye development 5-10 min intervals are usually acceptable. If some structures are to be automatically tracked, the subsequent time points must be sufficiently similar.
Fluorescent beads
Fluorescent beads primarily serve as fiducial markers for registering different views of a multiview dataset onto each other. Always vortex the bead solutions thoroughly before use. Do not heat the beads as this can lead to loss of the fluorescent dye. The optimal bead concentration for the multiview registration has to be determined experimentally. The described plugin works best with around 1,000 detected beads throughout each view. Larger (500 nm or 1,000 nm) beads are detected more robustly than smaller (less than 500 nm) beads. This is because larger beads are brighter and are easier to segment without false positive detections of structures in the sample. The disadvantage of the larger beads is that they are very prominent in the final fused and deconvolved image. For each new fluorescent marker, the appropriate bead size and fluorescence emission have to be optimized. To give an example of sample from Figure 5 and Movie 3, 100 nm green emission beads gave too many false positive detections in the membrane-GFP channel, but 1,000 nm red emission beads were robustly detected in the H2B-RFP channel with very few positive detections inside the sample. If the bead detection fails in the channel with the fluorescent marker, a separate channel only containing beads can be acquired, but this is not very practical. The sub-resolution sized beads give a direct readout of the point spread function (PSF) of the microscope, which can be used for deconvolution (Figure 2C-D). If registration and fusion works better with bigger beads (e.g. 1,000 nm), a separate image of the PSF can be acquired with sub-resolution, e.g., 100 nm beads. Using multicolor beads is helpful during registration of multichannel acquisition and for verifying that the channels overlay perfectly.
Addition of fluorescent beads is not necessary when imaging from a single view without subsequent multiview registration and fusion. However, even in those cases beads can be helpful during the initial light sheet adjustment to check for the quality of the light sheet and in general to reveal optical aberrations. Such optical aberrations may originate from various sources like damaged or dirty objectives, dirty windows of the chamber or inhomogeneity in the agarose. Beads can also be used for drift correction by the multiview registration Fiji plugin20.
Multiview
For the multiview reconstruction purpose, it is better to acquire an odd number of views 3, 5 and so on, which are not opposing each other. This improves deconvolution since the PSFs are imaged from different directions. It is also important to confirm at the beginning of the time lapse acquisition that there is sufficient overlap among the views. This is best done empirically, i.e., immediately confirming that the views in the first time point can be successfully registered. When the goal of the multiview acquisition is to increase the resolution of an image of a large scattering specimen, it is not advisable to image the entire specimen in each view, but to stop around the center of the sample, where the signal deteriorates. The low quality acquisition from the second half of the specimen would not add useful information to the multiview reconstruction.
2. Critical steps and troubleshooting for the data processing
Currently, there exist several possibilities for processing multiview data from a light sheet microscope that are well documented and relatively easy to adopt. We use the multiview reconstruction application, which is an open source software implemented in Fiji32 (Stephan Preibisch unpublished, Link 1a and Link1b in the List of Materials). This plugin is a major redesign of the previous SPIM registration plugin20, reviewed by Schmied et al.42, integrating the BigDataViewer and its XML and HDF5 format33 with the SPIM registration workflow (Figure 1B, Link 2, Link 3). This application can be also adapted for high performance computing cluster, which significantly speeds up the processing43. This multiview registration application is actively developed further and keeps improving. In case of problems or features requests for the described software, please file issues on the respective GitHub pages (Link 4 for Multiview Reconstruction and Link 5 for BigDataViewer).
The second option is to use the commercial software available together with the microscope. This solution works well and employs the same principle of using fluorescent beads to register the different views. However, it lacks the option to visualize the whole dataset fast like with the BigDataViewer. Also the software cannot be adapted to the cluster and furthermore the processing blocks the microscope for other users, unless additional license for the software is purchased.
The third option, which is also an open source software, was recently published by the Keller lab44 and provides a comprehensive framework for processing and downstream analysis of the light sheet data. This software is using information from within the sample to perform multiview fusion, therefore it does not require the presence of fluorescent beads around the sample. But at the same time it assumes orthogonal orientation of the imaging views (objectives), so it cannot be used for data acquired from arbitrary angles44.
Hardware requirements
The hardware used for processing can be found in Table 4. There has to be enough storage capacity and a clear pipeline for data processing available, ahead of the actual experiment. Acquisition of the images is faster than subsequent analysis and it is easy to get flooded with unprocessed data. It is often unrealistic to store all the raw images, but rather a cropped version or processed images like fused views, maximum intensity projections or spherical projections45.
| Processor | Two Intel Xeon Processor E5-2630 (Six Core, 2.30 GHz Turbo, 15 MB, 7.2 GT/sec) |
| Memory | 128 GB (16×8 GB) 1600 MHz DDR3 ECC RDIMM |
| Hard Drive | 4×4 TB 3.5inch Serial ATA (7.200 rpm) Hard Drive |
| HDD Controller | PERC H310 SATA/SAS Controller for Dell Precision |
| HDD Configuration | C1 SATA 3.5 inch, 1-4 Hard Drives |
| Graphics | Dual 2 GB NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (2 cards w/ 2 DP & 1 DVI-I each) (2 DP-DVI & 2 DVI-VGA adapter) (MRGA17H) |
| Network | Intel X520-T2 Dual Port 10 GbE Network Interface Card |
Table 4: Hardware Requirements.
Data processing speed
The time needed for data processing depends on the dimensions of the data and on the used hardware. In Table 1, we provide an overview of the time required for the key steps in processing an example 8.6 GB multiview dataset that consisted of 1 time point with 4 views and 2 channels.
| Processing step | Time | Protocol step |
| Resave as HDF5 | 6 min 30 sec | 6.3 |
| Detect Interest Points | 20 sec | 6.4 |
| Register using interest points | 3 sec | 6.5 |
| Content-based multiview fusion | 4 hr | 7.2 |
| Multiview deconvolution (CPU) | 8 hr | 7.3 |
| Multiview deconvolution (GPU) | 2 hr | 7.3 |
Table 1: Data Processing Time.
Input data formats for multiview reconstruction
The Fiji Plugin Multiview Reconstruction can support .czi, .tif and ome.tiff formats. Due to the data structure of the .czi format, discontinuous datasets are not supported without pre-processing. Discontinuous means that the recording had to be restarted (e.g. to readjust the positions due to drift of the sample). In this case the .czi files need to be resaved as .tif. For .tif files each view and illumination direction needs to be saved as a separate file.
Calibration of pixel size
The microscope-operating software calculates the calibration for the xy pixel size based on the selected objective. However, the pixel size in z is defined independently by the step size. If a wrong objective is specified in the software the xy to z ratio is incorrect and the registration will fail.
Initial registration
After defining the dataset the number of registrations will be 1 and the number of interest points will be 0 in the ViewSetup Explorer. The initial registration represents the calibration of the dataset. Both the number of registrations and interest points will increase during processing.
Down sampling for detection of interest points
Using down sampling is recommended, since the loading of the files and the segmentation will be much faster. It is however important to note that the detection parameters will change depending on the down sampling, thus transferring detection settings between different down sample settings is not possible.
Detection of interest points
It is advisable to segment as many true beads as possible in each view, even at the price of obtaining some false positive detections, because they do not hinder the registration considerably. Spurious detections, if few in numbers, are excluded during registration (See Registration of interest points). However, massive false positive detections pose a problem to the algorithm. It not only reduces performance for the detection and the registration, since it takes much longer to segment the image as well as compare these beads between the views, but it also reduces the accuracy of the registration. This can be addressed by using more stringent detection parameters. Additionally, over segmentation of the beads (i.e. multiple detections on one bead Figure 1E) is detrimental to the registration and should be avoided.
Registration of interest points
To register the views onto each other, the location of each bead in each view is described by its position with respect to its three nearest neighboring beads. These constellations are forming a local geometric descriptor and allow comparing each bead between the views. Beads with matching descriptor between two views are then considered as candidate correspondences. Note that this works only for randomly distributed beads, for which the local descriptors are typically unique for each bead. One can use other structures such as nuclei in the sample for registration. However, in order to detect nuclei, which are distributed non randomly in the sample, other methods apply20,21.
The candidate correspondences are then tested against RANSAC36 in order to exclude false positives. Each correspondence is suggesting a transformation model for overlaying the views onto each other. True correspondences would likely agree on one transformation model, whereas outliers would each point to a different one. The true correspondences are then used to compute an affine transformation model between the two compared views. A global optimization with an iterative optimization algorithm is then carried out, during which all the views are registered onto the first view with the aim of minimal displacement between the views20,21.
Time-lapse registration
Due to movement of the agarose and imprecise motor movement of the microscope stage, the position of each stack varies moderately over time. Whereas the registration of the individual time point removes the difference between the views of this time point, the time-lapse also needs to be registered as a whole. To this end, each individual time point is registered onto the reference time point.
Reference time point
If a time series with many time points is processed, a representative time point is selected as reference usually from the middle of the time series since the bead intensities can degrade over time due to bleaching. On this reference, the parameters for interest point detection, registration, bounding box and fusion can be determined. These parameters are then applied to the whole time lapse to compute a specific transformation model for each individual time point. During time-lapse registration all other time points are also registered spatially onto this reference time point. Thus the bounding box parameters for the entire recording are depending on this specific time point.
Multichannel registration
When imaging multiple channels, ideally the same fluorescent beads should be visible in all imaged channels. The detection and registration can then be performed on each channel individually, which takes into account the influence of the different light wavelengths on the transformation. Often this is not possible, because the beads are not visible in all channels or the beads are dominating the image too much in one channel and are too dim in the other channel(s). The typical solution is to use beads visible only in one channel for the detection and registration and the acquired transformation model (i.e. after detection, registration and time-lapse registration) is then applied to the other channels by Fiji > Plugins > Multiview Reconstruction > Batch Processing > Tools > Duplicate Transformations. In the drop down menu for Apply transformation of select One channel to other channels. In the following window select the XML and click OK. Then select the channel that contains the beads as Source channel and as Target channel select the channel(s) without beads. For Duplicate which transformations use Replace all transformations and press OK. The transformations are then copied to all other channels and saved in the XML. To see the new transformations in the ViewSetup Explorer, restart the MultiView Reconstruction Application.
Bounding box
The fusion of multiple views is computationally very intensive. However, large images are typically acquired to accommodate not only the sample, but also the beads around it. Once the registration parameters are extracted from the beads, they are no longer useful as part of the image. Therefore, to increase the efficiency of the fusion, only the parts of the image stacks containing the sample should be fused together. A region of interest (bounding box) should be defined to contain the sample and as little of the surrounding agarose as possible. For the example in Figure 2 a weighted average fusion on the entire volume with 2229×2136×2106 px would require 38,196 MB of RAM, whereas with a bounding box the volume is reduced to 1634×1746×1632 px and the memory requirements are reduced to 17,729 MB.
Content-based multiview fusion
The challenge in fusing multiview data is that the views usually end abruptly and do not contain the same image quality for the same voxels. Simple averaging of the views would therefore lead to blending artifacts and unnecessary image degradation. Content-based multiview fusion takes both of these problems into account. First, it blends the different views, where one image ends and the other one begins and second, it assesses the local image quality and applies higher weights to higher image quality in the fusion21. Compared to a single view there is an improvement of the resolution in z with a slight degradation of the signal in xy (Figure 2E-H, Figure 5A-D).
Multiview deconvolution
Multiview deconvolution is another approach to achieve the fusion of the views. With this method also the PSFs of the different views are taken into account in order to recover the image that has been convolved by the optics of the microscope. This method drastically improves image quality by removing image blur and increasing resolution and contrast of the signal31 (Figure 2C-D, Figure 2I-J, Figure 5E-G, Movie 3).
Deconvolution is computationally very intensive (see Table 1), thus using a GPU for processing increases the speed of this process. It may also be necessary to perform the deconvolution on down sampled data. To down sample, use Fiji > Multiview Reconstruction > Batch Processing > Tools > Apply Transformations. This will apply a new transformation model on the views that will be saved in the .xml file.
HDF5 file format for BigDataViewer and BigDataServer
The BigDataViewer33 allows easy visualization of terabyte-sized data. How to control the BigDataViewer is summarized in Table 2. A screencast of the basic operation of the program is also available as a supplement in its original publication33. The BigDataViewer is centered on an .xml file, which contains the metadata, and an hdf5 file, which contains the image data. The image data are present in the hdf5 in multiple resolution levels in 3D blocks. The multiple resolution levels allow for visualizing the data faster with lower resolution, before the full resolution is loaded. Individual blocks are only loaded into memory when needed. Thus, the hdf5 image format allows direct and fast visualization of the data via the BigDataViewer33. It also speeds up processing since the loading of the files is carried out more efficiently. Therefore, we recommend resaving the dataset into this format, although it is not strictly required for the processing. For further explanation of the data format, please refer to Link 3. Additionally, the datasets can be shared with collaborators or the public using the BigDataServer33 (Link 6).
| key | effect |
| F1 | shows the Help with a brief description of the BigDataViewer and its basic operation |
| < > or mouse wheel | movement in z |
| up and down arrow | zoom in and out |
| right click and drag | moves sample in the viewer |
| left click and drag | rotates sample around the cursor |
| slider at the bottom of the viewer or Tab and left or right arrow | moves on time axis |
| additionally pressing shift | faster movement or rotation along any axis |
| x and then left and right arrow | rotates around the x axis |
| y and then left and right arrow | rotates around the y axis |
| z and then left and right arrow | rotates around the z axis |
| shift and x | orients the view along x axis |
| shift and y | orients the view along y axis |
| shift and z | orients the view along z axis |
| i | switches between the different interpolation modes (i.e. nearest neighbor and trilinear) |
| s or Settings > Brightness & Contrast | modifies the color of the channels, brightness and contrast |
| F6 or Settings > Visibility and grouping | changes the displayed groups, enables grouping to overlaying different groups and calling the groups via the number keys |
| F10 or Tools > Record Movie | acquires a time series of the currently displayed slice |
Table 2: Big Data Viewer.
3. Limitations of the described implementation of LSFM
Low throughput
In a typical LSFM experiment only one sample per experiment is imaged. Still, in our experience, a lot of useful information can be extracted from that single sample. High throughput imaging of multiple embryos has been recently achieved in home built LSFM setups 46-48, although typically at the expense of freedom of sample positioning and rotation.
Insufficient penetration deep into tissues
Even though zebrafish embryos are translucent, the obtained image quality is deteriorating quickly when imaging deeper in the tissue due to scattering and absorption. Partially this is an effect of scattering and absorption of the emitted fluorescence by the sample and cannot be corrected in the current setup. Another source of the uneven image quality is the irregular illumination. The light sheet is incident from the left or right side and any objects in its path refract it, which results in stripe artifacts and blur. The dual sided illumination and multiview fusion can diminish the artifacts in the final image. Lastly, the image quality tends to be slightly worse towards the margin of the field of view due to the natural geometry of the light sheet, which is becoming thicker towards the edges.
Limited chemical manipulation
The use of drugs or inhibitors is widespread in zebrafish research. In this microscope use of drugs is constrained, due to the big volume of the sample chamber and considerations of other users of the instrument, who share the same chamber. Using an extra chamber dedicated to drug experiments can solve this issue. Filling the chamber partially with glass beads reduces the volume of liquid that is required.
No photomanipulation
Currently there is no possibility of localized optical manipulation like photoconversion, or laser ablation in this microscope. Nevertheless, home built setups can be used for such specific applications.
4. Significance and future applications
LSFM is the best method available to date for fast imaging of big volumes of live embryos. Most of the experiments conceivable on a confocal microscope can also be performed on a light sheet microscope with aforementioned advantages. In the case of imaging of eye development, the speed of LSFM is not the crucial parameter. Instead, the low phototoxicity and flexibility in sample positioning are the decisive benefits.
The LSFM data have a high SNR, which helps to achieve good deconvolution results and is also beneficial for automated image analysis and object tracking. In conclusion, LSFM is a great tool for generating quantifiable data on embryonic development and overall cell and tissue characteristics for subsequent modeling and physical descriptions of the processes in question.