scholarly journals The value of grain-size hydraulic conductivity estimates: Comparison with high resolution in-situ field hydraulic conductivity

2001 ◽  
Vol 28 (22) ◽  
pp. 4255-4258 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Eggleston ◽  
S. Rojstaczer
Keyword(s):  
Grain Size ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Hydraulic Conductivity

mRNA localization by Electron microscopic in situ hybridization

1991 ◽  
Vol 49 ◽  
pp. 430-431
Author(s):  
J. A. Pollock ◽  
M. Martone ◽  
T. Deerinck ◽  
M. H. Ellisman
Keyword(s):  
Electron Microscopy ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Nucleic Acids ◽  
Recombinant Dna ◽  
Light And Electron Microscopy ◽  
Electron Microscopic ◽  
High Voltage Electron Microscopy ◽  
Functional Sites ◽  
Voltage Electron

Localization of specific proteins in cells by both light and electron microscopy has been facilitate by the availability of antibodies that recognize unique features of these proteins. High resolution localization studies conducted over the last 25 years have allowed biologists to study the synthesis, translocation and ultimate functional sites for many important classes of proteins. Recently, recombinant DNA techniques in molecular biology have allowed the production of specific probes for localization of nucleic acids by “in situ” hybridization. The availability of these probes potentially opens a new set of questions to experimental investigation regarding the subcellular distribution of specific DNA's and RNA's. Nucleic acids have a much lower “copy number” per cell than a typical protein, ranging from one copy to perhaps several thousand. Therefore, sensitive, high resolution techniques are required. There are several reasons why Intermediate Voltage Electron Microscopy (IVEM) and High Voltage Electron Microscopy (HVEM) are most useful for localization of nucleic acids in situ.

Ultrastructural analysis of the spatial distribution of MRNA

1992 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 552-553
Author(s):  
Gary Bassell ◽  
Robert H. Singer
Keyword(s):  
Electron Microscopy ◽  
Spatial Distribution ◽  
In Situ Hybridization ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Nucleic Acids ◽  
Colloidal Gold ◽  
Dna Probe ◽  
Nucleotide Analogs ◽  
Gold Particles

We have been investigating the spatial distribution of nucleic acids intracellularly using in situ hybridization. The use of non-isotopic nucleotide analogs incorporated into the DNA probe allows the detection of the probe at its site of hybridization within the cell. This approach therefore is compatible with the high resolution available by electron microscopy. Biotinated or digoxigenated probe can be detected by antibodies conjugated to colloidal gold. Because mRNA serves as a template for the probe fragments, the colloidal gold particles are detected as arrays which allow it to be unequivocally distinguished from background.

High-Resolution Resistance Mapping in SEM

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grigore Moldovan ◽  
Wolfgang Joachimi ◽  
Guillaume Boetsch ◽  
Jörg Jatzkowski ◽  
Frank Altman
Keyword(s):  
Electron Microscopy ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscopy ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Reference Structure ◽  
Total Resistance ◽  
Embedded Electronics ◽  
Improved Performance ◽  
Mapping Techniques ◽  
Scanning Electron

Abstract This work presents advanced resistance mapping techniques based on Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) with nanoprobing systems and the related embedded electronics. Focus is placed on recent advances to reduce noise and increase speed, such as integration of dedicated in situ electronics into the nanoprobing platform, as well as an important transition from current-sensitive to voltagesensitive amplification. We show that it is now possible to record resistance maps with a resistance sensitivity in the 10W range, even when the total resistance of the mapped structures is in the range of 100W. A reference structure is used to illustrate the improved performance, and a lowresistance failure case is presented as an example of analysis made possible by these developments.

scholarly journals Venus: key to understanding the evolution of terrestrial planets

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin F. Wilson ◽  
Thomas Widemann ◽  
Richard Ghail
Keyword(s):  
High Temperature ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Radar Imaging ◽  
Space Science ◽  
Interior Surface ◽  
Extended Surface ◽  
Earth Like Planets ◽  
Orbital Mission

AbstractIn this paper, originally submitted in answer to ESA’s “Voyage 2050” call to shape the agency’s space science missions in the 2035–2050 timeframe, we emphasize the importance of a Venus exploration programme for the wider goal of understanding the diversity and evolution of habitable planets. Comparing the interior, surface, and atmosphere evolution of Earth, Mars, and Venus is essential to understanding what processes determined habitability of our own planet and Earth-like planets everywhere. This is particularly true in an era where we expect thousands, and then millions, of terrestrial exoplanets to be discovered. Earth and Mars have already dedicated exploration programmes, but our understanding of Venus, particularly of its geology and its history, lags behind. Multiple exploration vehicles will be needed to characterize Venus’ richly varied interior, surface, atmosphere and magnetosphere environments. Between now and 2050 we recommend that ESA launch at least two M-class missions to Venus (in order of priority): a geophysics-focussed orbiter (the currently proposed M5 EnVision orbiter – [1] – or equivalent); and an in situ atmospheric mission (such as the M3 EVE balloon mission – [2]). An in situ and orbital mission could be combined in a single L-class mission, as was argued in responses to the call for L2/L3 themes [3–5]. After these two missions, further priorities include a surface lander demonstrating the high-temperature technologies needed for extended surface missions; and/or a further orbiter with follow-up high-resolution surface radar imaging, and atmospheric and/or ionospheric investigations.

scholarly journals Graphene-sealed Si/SiN cavities for high-resolution in situ electron microscopy of nano-confined solutions (Phys. Status Solidi B 12/2016)

2016 ◽  
Vol 253 (12) ◽  
pp. 2544-2544
Author(s):  
Haider Rasool ◽  
Gabriel Dunn ◽  
Aidin Fathalizadeh ◽  
Alex Zettl
Keyword(s):  
Electron Microscopy ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
In Situ Electron Microscopy

scholarly journals Advanced multichannel submersible probe for autonomous high-resolution in situ monitoring of the cycling of the potentially bioavailable fraction of a range of trace metals

Chemosphere ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 131014
Author(s):  
Mary-Lou Tercier-Waeber ◽  
Fabio Confalonieri ◽  
Melina Abdou ◽  
Lionel Dutruch ◽  
Cécile Bossy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Trace Metals ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
In Situ Monitoring ◽  
Bioavailable Fraction

scholarly journals Laboratory and In Situ Determination of Hydraulic Conductivity and Their Validity in Transient Seepage Analysis

Water ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. 1131
Author(s):  
Soonkie Nam ◽  
Marte Gutierrez ◽  
Panayiotis Diplas ◽  
John Petrie
Keyword(s):  
Hydraulic Conductivity ◽  
Field Measurements ◽  
Natural Soil ◽  
In Situ Tests ◽  
Seepage Analysis ◽  
Soil Deposits ◽  
Seepage Modeling ◽  
Sample Disturbance

This paper critically compares the use of laboratory tests against in situ tests combined with numerical seepage modeling to determine the hydraulic conductivity of natural soil deposits. Laboratory determination of hydraulic conductivity used the constant head permeability and oedometer tests on undisturbed Shelby tube and block soil samples. The auger hole method and Guelph permeameter tests were performed in the field. Groundwater table elevations in natural soil deposits with different hydraulic conductivity values were predicted using finite element seepage modeling and compared with field measurements to assess the various test results. Hydraulic conductivity values obtained by the auger hole method provide predictions that best match the groundwater table’s observed location at the field site. This observation indicates that hydraulic conductivity determined by the in situ test represents the actual conditions in the field better than that determined in a laboratory setting. The differences between the laboratory and in situ hydraulic conductivity values can be attributed to factors such as sample disturbance, soil anisotropy, fissures and cracks, and soil structure in addition to the conceptual and procedural differences in testing methods and effects of sample size.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document