Fig. 5: Comparisons between Pocket MUSE imaging and other imaging modalities. | Communications Biology

Fig. 5: Comparisons between Pocket MUSE imaging and other imaging modalities.

From: Pocket MUSE: an affordable, versatile and high-performance fluorescence microscope using a smartphone

Fig. 5

A slice of carrot stained with 0.05% w/v rhodamine B and 0.01% w/v DAPI was imaged with (a) UV illumination on Pocket MUSE. b bright-field illumination on Pocket MUSE, (c) a benchtop fluorescence microscope using 405/488/594 nm excitation light and a 10× objective, (d) benchtop MUSE microscope, and (e) benchtop microscope with bright-field illumination. Additional comparisons of Pocket MUSE images with MUSE illumination (left) and bright-field illumination (right) show (f) and (g) the surface of a cilantro stem (no staining), and (h) and (i) a cluster of filamentous algae stained with 0.05% w/v propidium iodide followed by rinsing in 1% w/v hydroquinone. Additional images are shown in Supplementary Fig. 4.11. Scale bars: 300 µm.

Back to article page