Not Applicable.
Not Applicable.
Not Applicable.
(1) Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to methods of operating a microscope, in general, and to a method of operating a laser scanning microscope having at least two independently controlled light distributions, in particular.
(2) Description of Related Art
Confocal laser microscopy is, among other things, the tool for the defined control of micro objects. Versatile methods of examining and influencing microscopic objects were recommended on this basis—e.g., Denk in U.S. Pat. No. 5,034,613, TPA, Liu in U.S. Pat. No. 6,159,749, Tweezer or Karl Otto Greulich in “Micromanipulation by Light in Biology and Medicine” 1999. A combination of a point-scanning or line-scanning imaging system and a “manipulator” system has evoked increasing interest in the specialized world.
Interest in observing and analyzing fast microscopic processes has created new devices and processes (e.g., line scanner LSM 5 LIVE), whose combination with the manipulation methods mentioned above leads to new insights. In this context, the simultaneous microscopic observation of a light induced, locally resolved sample manipulation with the help of a suitable imaging system occupies the foreground (U.S. Pat. No. 6,094,300 and DE 102 004 03 4987 A1). Modern microscopes therefore try to offer the maximum possible number of flexible and optically equivalent coupling and decoupling positions (DE 102 004 01 6433 A1).
The simultaneous availability of at least two coupling positions for independent scanning systems is very important in this context for avoiding limitations in time resolution due to slow mechanical control processes. In addition to tubular interface, there are other coupling positions on the sides of the microscope stands (preferably in an extended infinite space between the microscope objective and tube lens; “side ports”) as well as on the rear side of the stand (typically optically modified reflected or transmitted light axes with suitable tube lens; “rear ports”) as well as the bottom side (“base port”). In principle, arrangements with a common beaming direction (either reflected light or transmitted light) or the opposite beaming direction (reflected light and transmitted light) are conceivable. Apart from the applicative background, the technical instrument-based view of the common beaming direction is often preferred.
At least one element must be used in this case that combines the beam paths of the two instruments in the space between the scanners of the simultaneously operated scanning systems and the objective. According to the prior art, one can think of the most varied of beam-combining elements such as for instance, optical-mechanical components like suitably coated beam-combining, flat plates and beam-combining wedges, beam-combining cubes and a polarization splitter. Further, beam-combining acoustic-optical modulators and deflectors are also conceivable.
The mechanical requirements related to the precision of location and angle of this beam-combining element are very high. A faulty installation angle α causes a beam inclination in the reflection of 2α For example, if the beam-combining element is in the infinite space between a tube lens of focal length fTL=164 mm and an objective of the nominal foreground M=fTL/fObj=40× then this leads to an angular deviation of 2α=1′(position deviation of the beam-combining element 0.5′) to a deviation Δ=(fTL/M)*tan 2α=1.2 μm of both scanning fields in the object plane. In a field of view 18 (image diagonals) this already corresponds to a deviation of approximately 0.4% of the lateral length of the scanning field. In the usual image formats of 512×512 or 1024×1024, this corresponds to a deviation of 2-4 image pixels. In addition to the demanding mechanical requirements related to the mechanical positioning of the beam-combining element, there are similarly demanding tolerance specifications related to the mechanical interfaces of the imaging or manipulation scanning module (inclination errors and lateral shifting of interface, intermediate image position in axial direction, and rotation). Further, thermal influences (heating of the microscope system, and fluctuations in the environmental temperature) as well as undefined statistical effects, impose a condition that occurs especially in case of extremely precise measurements, the cover of the scanning fields in the manipulating and imaging systems must be adjusted repeatedly.
To compensate for the pixel displacement (x, y) between the manipulating and imaging scanning modules that cannot be controlled fully through the mechanical tolerance chain, this patent suggests calibration in such a way that, through various methods, the position deviations of the scanning fields of the two systems are determined and the coordinate transformations resulting there from (scaling, rotation, shift) are computed and considered in the control of at least one of the scanning systems.
In this context, it must be considered that the resulting image cover parameters are influenced by numerous device settings. An example of this would be the different main beam splitters of a confocal laser scanning microscope, which in several commercial devices is arranged on a motorized main beam splitter wheel. If the excitation beams are reflected on the main beam splitter at less than 90°, minor angular errors are already observable in the scanning field cover. Examples of other adjustable device parameters that can influence the scanning field cover crucially are movable optics (e.g. viewing field or pupil zoom) as well as non-linear factors and dynamic deviations of the beam deflecting devices used in the concerned scanning systems (e.g. selected scanning speed and scanning zoom in devices on the basis of galvo scanners). Add to this the fact that the wavelength dependency of the z-deposit is to be calibrated as a function of the excitation and manipulation wavelengths used in different applications as well as of the concerned used objective. The z-plane comparison can be conducted elegantly through moveable collimator optics of the imaging and/or manipulating system under scrutiny of the color length fault of the concerned used objective.
Depending on the concerned application, the spectral use area can stretch basically from the ultraviolet to the infrared range for the imaging system as well as the manipulating system. Typical manipulation wavelengths used in applications are, e.g., 351, 355 and 364 nm (photo-uncaging), 405 nm (photo conversion, Kaede, Dronpa, PA-GFP), 488 and 532 nm (photo bleaching, FRET, FRAP, FLIP) as well as 780-900 nm (multi-photon bleach, e.g., MPFRAP, 2-photon uncaging; direct multi-photon stimulation). Depending on the combined wavelength as well as the coupling positions of the imaging system and the manipulating system, there are numerous types of dichroitic beam-combining elements that are meaningful from the application point of view.
Depending on the application under consideration, there is a typical requirement of using different beam-combining element types in a microscope system. A motorized replacement device is used for this purpose. It can be, e.g., a motorized reflector revolver in the area of the infinite space between the objective and tube lens, as illustrated in
Another problem is the ability to mechanically reproduce (beam-combining element location and beam-combining element alignment) the scanning position of the replacement device. Thus, on the one hand, the precision and reproduction capacity requirements of the replacement device increase as compared to traditional light-microscopic systems, and, on the other hand, claims of the practical management of the calibration method mentioned above. Even the complete replacement of the revolver device displayed in
In short, there is a need for the very general requirement of the simplest possible calibration method that allows the correction of the scanning field cover of the imaging system and the manipulating system as a function of varying device settings. This calibration method should particularly be used by the device user and if possible, it should be possible to execute it automatically.
a illustrates the non-coinciding scanning fields of a mapped scanning system (imaging) and a manipulation system (manipulating) with orientations;
b illustrates an affine transformation with reference to the orientation points P1-P3 and their position;
a, the imaging system in transmission and the manipulating system in reflection are coupled or decoupled. In
c displays a stationary focus of the manipulation system where at least three such focuses are captured directly in the direction of reflection in the imaging system.
The invention is described in greater detail in the following pages with the help of the following schematic diagrams:
a illustrates the non-coinciding scanning fields of a mapped scanning system (imaging) and a manipulation system (manipulating) with orientations, deviating from each other, of the schematically represented X/Y orientation as well as orientation points P1-P3 whose position on both systems are used for overlapping.
b illustrates an affine transformation with reference to the orientation points P1-P3 and their position.
In
A luminescent light point or a light point created elsewhere through frequency conversion is captured and used, instead of the focus, in
The light-inducing sample modifications created by the manipulation system are captured by the imaging system and used as points in
In this case, a transformation of the k and j coordinates of the manipulating system in the concerned m and n coordinates of the imaging system is possible with the help of an affine mapping (compare
m=m
0
+a11k+j (1a)
n=n
0
+a
21
k+j (1b)
Thus, if the coordinates of at least three points are defined in the two independent scanning coordinate systems within the framework of a suitable calibration, Equations (1a) and (1b) can be used to convert the coordinates of the two scanning systems into each other for random scanning field points. A total of six image cover parameters are to be determined in this calibration process: Offset (zero position), angle (mutual rotation) and three stretching parameters. This therefore enables control of the beam deflecting device of the manipulating system in such a way that a pixel-precise cover with the object field of the imaging system is possible (or vice versa).
This method of implementing a pixel-precise scanning field cover of the two independent scanning systems presupposes that at least one system has a programmable, automatically triggering beam deflecting device.
This can be based on one of the following scanning principles:
(As the two scanning systems must be independent of each other in the sense of the invention, a mechanical x- and y-displacement of the sample is not permissible.)
In the case of the Galvo mirror that is used frequently in commercial systems, a transformation, for example, corresponding to Equation (1a, 1b) is possible through suitable adjustment of the gain and offset values of the associated triggering electronics.
In confocal systems, coverage of the scanning coordinates of the imaging and manipulating system in three-dimensional space is possible. As in the plane, a transformation of the two scanning coordinate systems in space can be undertaken:
x=φ
1(u,v,w) (2a)
y=φ
2(u,v,w) (2b)
z=φ
3(u,v,w) (2c)
Three-dimensional sample objects are captured in confocal imaging systems in which z microscopic images of the section planes x, y are recorded for each different sample depth.
Between recordings of the individual confocal split images, the sample depth z is varied in each case through a mechanical displacement of the sample, the objective or the entire microscope unit. In addition to the customary (micro) mechanical drive systems, one can also use acousto-optical modulators, especially in quick imaging systems for z-adjustment.
A preferred embodiment therefore uses two scanning systems that are independent in the x- and y-directions as the imaging system and manipulating system respectively, where at least one system has a programmable, automatically triggering beam deflection device so that a pixel-precise scanning cover is possible with the help of the affine mapping Equations (1a, 1b). In this preferred embodiment, the scanning process in the z-direction affects both systems identically; e.g., the sample or the common objective is displaced in the z-direction. In this case, it must be guaranteed that the scanning planes of the two independent modules overlap fully. A mutual adjustment ensures that scanning planes are not misaligned relative to each other. The comparison of the parallel scanning planes in the z-direction takes place preferably with the help of suitable motorized adjustable optics. The collimators described in DE 19702753 A1 are preferably used. The use of motorized optics for z-comparison of the two scanning planes enable the automated correction of chromatic longitudinal errors of the different objectives used, at the different excitation and manipulation wavelengths.
If, however, the two independent scanning modules do not have any common beaming direction on the sample, an independent scanning device is required for both systems in general in the z-direction. To implement a pixel-precise cover of the x, y, and z-scanning devices in a three-dimensional space in this case, one must use the generalized Equations (2a-c).
The determination of the concerned transformation equation with the help of which the two independent scanning systems can be superimposed with pixel precision requires a suitable calibration method. Hence, it has already been mentioned that the affine mapping Equations (1a, b) can be determined uniquely if the coordinates of at least three scanning field points are known in both the scanning coordinate systems.
In a calibration method according to the invention, the position of the stationary focus of the manipulating scanning system is determined with the help of the scanning imaging system. If this procedure is followed for a minimum of three focus positions of the manipulating system, it is possible to obtain a clear determination of the transformation equation (1a, b). Different practical embodiments of this calibration method are conceivable:
1. In the simplest case, the stationary laser focus of the manipulating system is observed directly with the help of the confocal imaging system according to
2. In a transformation of the calibration method 1 corresponding to
3. In another transformation of calibration methods 1 and 2, a suitable unstructured sample substrate is modified through illumination with the stationary focus of the manipulating system, according to
Decisive for the function of the three described calibration methods is a correct adjustment of the confocal opening of the concerned imaging system (e.g., pinhole for point scanners and slot opening for line scanners). In calibration methods 2 and 3, the signal light lies typically in the range of the visible spectrum (i.e., in the detection area typical in most applications). Hence, these calibration methods have the same requirements with regard to correct adjustment of the confocal opening as in the commercial confocal microscopes. In calibration method 1 however, the confocal opening is to be adjusted in such a way that a direct detection of laser light can take place in which the spectral range can lie, if necessary, even in the ultraviolet or infrared range.
Wavelength dependencies of the detection channel of the imaging system thus play the most crucial role in calibration method 1. In a design model of the invention, the three calibration methods 1-3 were combined with the automatic position optimization of the confocal opening. This automated adjustment of the confocal opening can be performed interactively by the device user—a suitable software interface is available for this—or it can also be undertaken fully automatically by microscope systems within the framework of the actual calibration method. The optimum adjusting positions for the concerned device settings can be stored in the corresponding calibration records.
In general, calibration methods 1 to 3 combine a dynamic scanning process of a module with a static focus positioning of the concerned other scanning module. In contrast, no spot bleaching is carried out in most of the applications described at the start. Instead, the bleaching process takes place within an extended “region of interest.” All thus far explained calibration methods have the disadvantage that dynamic effects of the beam deflection device of one of the scanning modules cannot be determined during the calibration of the scanning field cover. As explained earlier, such dynamic effects are encountered especially in Galvo scanners in which the scanning field cover can depend, for example, on the concerned selected scanning speed and the concerned scanning zoom.
This disadvantage is rectified with the help of a basically different calibration method illustrated in
A precondition of this calibration method is that both scanning systems enable the image capturing of the calibration sample independently of each other. If no detector suitable for the image capturing is integrated in the manipulating system (e.g., a cost-effective diode with simple grab electronics), then an external detector according to
Due to the parallel data capture, this method is ideal, particularly if a confocal linear scanner is used as the imaging system. This calibration method has the advantage of being a dynamic method, i.e., relative changes between the image field overlap between the two scanning modules can be determined directly as a function of the scanning speed and scanning zoom. Thus, the dynamic effects of the concerned beam deflecting device can be considered in the appropriate calibration records.
All the thus far described methods of optimizing the scanning field overlap can be automated with the help of suitable software in which a constant interaction of the device user is required. In contrast, the arrangement displayed in
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
10 2006 034 906.7 | Jul 2006 | DE | national |