Author(s):  
Godfrey C. Hoskins

The first serious electron microscooic studies of chromosomes accompanied by pictures were by I. Elvers in 1941 and 1943. His prodigious study, from the manufacture of micronets to the development of procedures for interpreting electron micrographs has gone all but unnoticed. The application of todays sophisticated equipment confirms many of the findings he gleaned from interpretation of images distorted by the electron optics of that time. In his figure 18 he notes periodic arrangement of pepsin sensitive “prickles” now called secondary fibers. In his figure 66 precise regularity of arrangement of these fibers can be seen. In his figure 22 he reproduces Siegbahn's first stereoscopic electron micrograph of chromosomes.The two stereoscopic pairs of electron micrographs of a human chromosome presented here were taken with a metallurgical stage on a Phillips EM200. These views are interpreted as providing photographic evidence that primary fibers (1°F) about 1,200Å thick are surrounded by secondary fibers (2°F) arranged in regular intervals of about 2,800Å in this metanhase human chromosome. At the telomere the primary fibers bend back on themselves and entwine through the center of each of each chromatid. The secondary fibers are seen to continue to surround primary fibers at telomeres. Thus at telomeres, secondary fibers present a surface not unlike that of the side of the chromosome, and no more susceptible to the addition of broken elements from other chromosomes.


Author(s):  
William J. Baxter

In this form of electron microscopy, photoelectrons emitted from a metal by ultraviolet radiation are accelerated and imaged onto a fluorescent screen by conventional electron optics. image contrast is determined by spatial variations in the intensity of the photoemission. The dominant source of contrast is due to changes in the photoelectric work function, between surfaces of different crystalline orientation, or different chemical composition. Topographical variations produce a relatively weak contrast due to shadowing and edge effects.Since the photoelectrons originate from the surface layers (e.g. ∼5-10 nm for metals), photoelectron microscopy is surface sensitive. Thus to see the microstructure of a metal the thin layer (∼3 nm) of surface oxide must be removed, either by ion bombardment or by thermal decomposition in the vacuum of the microscope.


Author(s):  
R. H. Geiss

The theory and practical limitations of micro area scanning transmission electron diffraction (MASTED) will be presented. It has been demonstrated that MASTED patterns of metallic thin films from areas as small as 30 Åin diameter may be obtained with the standard STEM unit available for the Philips 301 TEM. The key to the successful application of MASTED to very small area diffraction is the proper use of the electron optics of the STEM unit. First the objective lens current must be adjusted such that the image of the C2 aperture is quasi-stationary under the action of the rocking beam (obtained with 40-80-160 SEM settings of the P301). Second, the sample must be elevated to coincide with the C2 aperture image and its image also be quasi-stationary. This sample height adjustment must be entirely mechanical after the objective lens current has been fixed in the first step.


Author(s):  
Gertrude F. Rempfer

I became involved in electron optics in early 1945, when my husband Robert and I were hired by the Farrand Optical Company. My husband had a mathematics Ph.D.; my degree was in physics. My main responsibilities were connected with the development of an electrostatic electron microscope. Fortunately, my thesis research on thermionic and field emission, in the late 1930s under the direction of Professor Joseph E. Henderson at the University of Washington, provided a foundation for dealing with electron beams, high vacuum, and high voltage.At the Farrand Company my co-workers and I used an electron-optical bench to carry out an extensive series of tests on three-electrode electrostatic lenses, as a function of geometrical and voltage parameters. Our studies enabled us to select optimum designs for the lenses in the electron microscope. We early on discovered that, in general, electron lenses are not “thin” lenses, and that aberrations of focal point and aberrations of focal length are not the same. I found electron optics to be an intriguing blend of theory and experiment. A laboratory version of the electron microscope was built and tested, and a report was given at the December 1947 EMSA meeting. The micrograph in fig. 1 is one of several which were presented at the meeting. This micrograph also appeared on the cover of the January 1949 issue of Journal of Applied Physics. These were exciting times in electron microscopy; it seemed that almost everything that happened was new. Our opportunities to publish were limited to patents because Mr. Farrand envisaged a commercial instrument. Regrettably, a commercial version of our laboratory microscope was not produced.


Author(s):  
Y. Taniguchi ◽  
E. Nakazawa ◽  
S. Taya

Imaging energy filters can add new information to electron microscopic images with respect to energy-axis, so-called electron spectroscopic imaging (ESI). Recently, many good results have been reported using this imaging technique. ESI also allows high-contrast observation of unstained biological samples, becoming a trend of the field of morphology. We manufactured a new type of energy filter as a trial production. This energy filter consists of two magnets, and we call γ-filter since the trajectory of electrons shows ‘γ’-shape inside the filter. We evaluated the new energyγ-filter TEM with the γ-filter.Figure 1 shows schematic view of the electron optics of the γ-type energy filter. For the determination of the electron-optics of the γ-type energy filter, we used the TRIO (Third Order Ion Optics) program which has been developed for the design of high resolution mass spectrometers. The TRIO takes the extended fringing fields (EFF) into consideration. EFF makes it difficult to design magnetic energy filters with magnetic sector fields.


Author(s):  
R. Vincent

Microanalysis and diffraction on a sub-nanometre scale have become practical in modern TEMs due to the high brightness of field emission sources combined with the short mean free paths associated with both elastic and inelastic scattering of incident electrons by the specimen. However, development of electron diffraction as a quantitative discipline has been limited by the absence of any generalised theory for dynamical inelastic scattering. These problems have been simplified by recent innovations, principally the introduction of spectrometers such as the Gatan imaging filter (GIF) and the Zeiss omega filter, which remove the inelastic electrons, combined with annual improvements in the speed of computer workstations and the availability of solid-state detectors with high resolution, sensitivity and dynamic range.Comparison of experimental data with dynamical calculations imposes stringent requirements on the specimen and the electron optics, even when the inelastic component has been removed. For example, no experimental CBED pattern ever has perfect symmetry, departures from the ideal being attributable to residual strain, thickness averaging, inclined surfaces, incomplete cells and amorphous surface layers.


Author(s):  
Arthur V. Jones

In comparison with the developers of other forms of instrumentation, scanning electron microscope manufacturers are among the most conservative of people. New concepts usually must wait many years before being exploited commercially. The field emission gun, developed by Albert Crewe and his coworkers in 1968 is only now becoming widely available in commercial instruments, while the innovative lens designs of Mulvey are still waiting to be commercially exploited. The associated electronics is still in general based on operating procedures which have changed little since the original microscopes of Oatley and his co-workers.The current interest in low-voltage scanning electron microscopy will, if sub-nanometer resolution is to be obtained in a useable instrument, lead to fundamental changes in the design of the electron optics. Perhaps this is an opportune time to consider other fundamental changes in scanning electron microscopy instrumentation.


1974 ◽  
Vol 35 (C6) ◽  
pp. C6-131-C6-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. HAZONY ◽  
R. H. HERBER

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document