Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 7 minor 36 references

Fluholoscopy. Compact and Simple Platform Combining Fluorescence and Holographic Microscopy

T0 review · 2 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper reports a microscope platform that captures fluorescence and quantitative phase images in the same snapshot using one blue laser and two cameras.

desk verdict Clever single-wavelength FI+QPI layout with honest Gabor caveats, but the 'single snapshot' claim is overstated because the two arms are not truly synchronized. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.09639 v1 pith:74YEE7DK submitted 2025-01-16 physics.optics

David Alonso , Javier Garcia , Vicente Mico This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.optics
keywords fluorescenceimagingquantitativephaseGaborholographymultimodalmicroscopysinglesnapshotcompactmicroscopein-linedichroicfilter
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper reports a microscope platform that captures fluorescence and quantitative phase images of the same specimen at the same time, using a single blue laser as the only light source. The laser both excites a fluorophore and forms an in-line Gabor hologram; a dichroic long-pass filter sends the fluorescent emission to one camera and the coherent hologram to another. If the approach holds, any lab with a basic microscope could add an inexpensive laser and two cameras to get complementary structural and functional views of live samples in one snapshot, without switching illumination between frames. The authors demonstrate the concept on static test targets and on moving beads, sperm cells, and lab-grown microorganisms.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Gabor in-line hologram recorded by an axially displaced camera, combined with a single illumination wavelength that does double duty as fluorescence excitation and coherent illumination. Because the sample transmits 450 nm light while the fluorophore emits above the 490 nm dichroic cut-on, a long-pass filter cleanly separates the two paths after the tube lens. The hologram is reconstructed by numerical back-propagation of the recorded intensity using the convolution form of the Rayleigh-Sommerfeld diffraction integral, and the system is calibrated by sweeping the defocus distance to find the flat best-resolution region between 700 and 1450 micrometers. This machinery is what lets one source and two cameras produce both modalities from one snapshot.

What would settle it

Take a dense or thick biological sample, for instance a confluent cell monolayer or a 20-micrometer-thick specimen chamber, whose true optical thickness is known from an independent measurement, and compare the phase heights retrieved by this platform; if the retrieved heights deviate by much more than the roughly 20 to 30 percent accuracy reported for thin isolated targets, or if overlapping objects produce artifacts that hide the true structure, the central claim that the platform delivers quantitative phase on general samples fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper claims that the simplest possible dual-mode architecture, one illumination wavelength, one dichroic mirror, one common path, and two cameras, is enough to deliver simultaneous fluorescence and quantitative phase imaging. Calibrating the holographic camera's defocus at 1100 micrometers of object shift, the phase channel resolves features down to 1.74 micrometers on a USAF phase target and recovers nominal phase-target heights of 100 nm and 150 nm within the experimental error bars, while the 50 nm target is overestimated because of twin-image and coherent noise. The fluorescence channel reaches a signal-to-noise ratio of 9.2 plus or minus 0.9 and a signal-to-background ratio of 2.95 plus or minus 0.15 in the bead test. The authors validate the combined platform on static and flowing fluorescent beads, water-suspended cultures, live microorganisms, and human sperm cells, and they report that dynamic events can be tracked at 10 frames per second.

Load-bearing premise

The phase image is trustworthy only if the sample is sparse and weakly scattering enough that the recorded hologram can be treated as the propagated object wave and back-propagated directly; dense, thick, or strongly refractive specimens break this Gabor condition and would corrupt the retrieved phase.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A standard bright-field microscope can be upgraded to dual-mode imaging by inserting a coherent source before the sample and an add-on module with a dichroic filter and two cameras at the exit port.
  • Fast biological events that would be missed by sequential switching between modalities can be followed at 10 frames per second because fluorescence and phase images are recorded in parallel.
  • The phase channel provides morphological context, such as the full cell body and the liquid edge, that fluorescence alone misses.
  • Quantitative thickness extraction is possible from a single Gabor hologram, with 100 nm and 150 nm steps recovered inside their error bars.
  • The platform can operate as a standalone holographic microscope when fluorescence is not needed.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the design only requires selecting a laser wavelength, a fluorophore, and a dichroic cut-on, the same architecture could be adapted to other excitation and emission pairs; this is a direct extension of the paper's configurable-concept claim, not something the authors tested.
  • Adding twin-image removal or multi-wavelength phase retrieval would likely close the gap seen on the 50 nm target and at bead edges, since the authors identify twin-image noise as the main error source.
  • The holographic channel could eventually supply the depth information needed to turn the single-plane fluorescence image into a digitally refocused 3D fluorescence volume, a direction the authors explicitly say they are pursuing.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 7 minor

Summary. The manuscript describes a compact microscope platform ("Fluholoscopy") that combines fluorescence imaging (FI) and quantitative phase imaging (QPI) by using a single 450 nm laser for both fluorescence excitation and coherent illumination. After the tube lens, a dichroic mirror separates the emission and the hologram onto two cameras. The authors calibrate the optimal defocus distance for Gabor in-line holography, validate the phase channel against USAF phase targets with nominal heights of 50–150 nm, characterize the FI channel with fluorescent beads, and present simultaneous images and videos for static and moving samples, including flowing beads, human sperm cells, and lab-made cultures.

Significance. If the simultaneity claim is properly established, the platform is an attractive, simple, and low-cost solution for dual-mode FI/QPI, with the phase channel validated against external standards (manufacturer thickness values and known refractive index) and the FI channel characterized by SNR/SBR. The use of a single illumination wavelength for both modalities simplifies the optical layout compared to two-color or sequential systems. The paper also demonstrates that the phase channel can resolve 1.74 µm features and provides quantitative thickness estimates within roughly 20–30% for two of the three phase targets. These are concrete, useful contributions for the microscopy community.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 2.2, Abstract, Introduction] The described synchronization ("the acquisition framerate has been fixed to ... 10 fps coming from CAM2") does not guarantee that the two cameras acquire exposures at the same time. With a 100 ms FI integration time and a ~0.1 ms hologram exposure, the FI image is a time-averaged representation of the sample, and without a hardware trigger or a stated exposure-overlap mechanism the hologram can be recorded at any point within that window. For the dynamic samples used as validation (flowing beads, sperm cells, moving cultures), a feature moving at ~50 µm/s would travel ~5 µm during the FI exposure, exceeding the reported 1.74 µm resolution. The assertion that both modes capture "same snapshots at the same time" is therefore unsupported for the moving-sample demonstrations. Please provide hardware synchronization details or revise the single-snapshot/simultaneous claim and discuss the temporal resolution limitation.
  2. [Section 3.1.2, Table 1] For the 50 nm nominal thickness target, the retrieved value (77±15 nm) does not overlap with the manufacturer's measured value (59.1 nm) within the quoted uncertainty, indicating a systematic error that is not captured by the reported error bars. The paper attributes this to twin-image noise and coherent artifacts, but the claim that measurements are "quite close to the real ones" is stronger than the data support for this case. Please either include the systematic offset in the error budget (e.g., by adding a term for twin-image residual) or soften the quantitative-accuracy claim; reporting the mean absolute error across the three targets would also help.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Section 2.1, Eq. (1)] The text states that U(x,y) is the "amplitude" "coming from the recorded intensity distribution," but it is not clear whether the square root of the intensity is taken before propagation; please specify the preprocessing step.
  2. [Section 3.1.1] The calibration sweep is described as using "the 150 nm-thickness USAF-style phase resolution test," but the target has three height regions; please clarify whether the 150 nm area was used exclusively for the defocus sweep.
  3. [Figure 3] The reported resolution of 1.74 µm for group 9, element 2 should be defined as the line width or the period, since USAF target conventions vary (the period is twice the line width).
  4. [Section 4] The explanation of the magnification difference between FI and QPI (MG = d/z) is confusing, because for collimated illumination (point source at infinity) d/z is not a meaningful ratio; please clarify the origin of the FOV mismatch.
  5. [Abstract and Introduction] The Discussion appropriately acknowledges the Gabor weak-scattering limitation, but the abstract and introduction claim "quantitative phase imaging" without this caveat; please add a brief qualifier (e.g., "for sparse, weakly scattering samples") to avoid overgeneralization.
  6. [References and Acknowledgments] Minor typographical errors: Refs. [3] and [4] contain "Springuer" instead of "Springer"; in the Acknowledgments, "colabroación" should be "colaboración"; and "Visualizations" are referenced inconsistently.
  7. [Data Availability Statement] Data Availability states "Not applicable"; for a methods-focused study, providing representative raw holograms and fluorescence images would increase reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the phase channel is calibrated against an external phase target and validated against manufacturer-measured heights, while the fluorescence channel is independent; self-citations are contextual.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks. The phase-retrieval pipeline is the standard Rayleigh-Sommerfeld back-propagation defined in Eqs. (1)-(2), with propagation distance d treated as an experimentally swept parameter: Section 3.1.1 scans defocus and selects z = 1100 um by resolution and phase-contrast criteria, not by matching the target heights. The quantitative height recovery in Eq. (3) uses the known wavelength, the manufacturer-specified refractive index of Corning Eagle XG, and the measured phase step, and the retrieved thicknesses are compared with independent manufacturer-measured values (Table 1); this is an external benchmark, not a fit. The fluorescence channel is recorded through a separate dichroic path and is never used to constrain or post-calibrate the phase retrieval. The cited prior work by the same group (ref. 32, Gabor-regime phase imaging) provides context and a standard weak-scattering ansatz that is stated explicitly in Section 2.3 ('requires a weak diffracting object') rather than smuggled in. The remaining skeptical caveat about exposure times (100 ms fluorescence vs ~0.1 ms hologram, with only frame-rate matching and no hardware trigger) concerns temporal simultaneity of the two channels, a correctness/validation issue, not a circularity of the derivation. No equation or fitted parameter is identical by construction to the claimed result, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim does not rest on invented entities. It rests on the standard Gabor weak-scattering approximation for the phase channel, the spectral separation assumption for the dichroic mirror, and one system-specific calibration parameter, the defocus distance. These are all stated or standard.

free parameters (1)
  • Optimal defocus distance Δz = 1100 µm (image-space displacement Δz' ≈ 11 cm)
    Chosen by sweeping 300 to 1800 µm in 50 µm steps and selecting the distance with highest USAF resolution and phase contrast on the same setup; all subsequent QPI reconstructions use this system-specific value.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The sample must satisfy the Gabor weak-scattering condition: low optical density, sparse distribution, and no occlusions between objects.
    Stated in Section 2.3 ('requires a weak diffracting object') and Discussion ('thick/volume samples must still satisfy Gabor's condition'). If false, in-line hologram reconstruction degrades or fails.
  • domain assumption The recorded intensity in the hologram plane can be used directly as the propagated complex amplitude U(x,y) in Eq. 1, and single-step back-propagation without twin-image suppression gives phase values accurate enough for the intended use.
    The method has no iterative twin-image mitigation; Section 3.1.2 attributes height deviations to 'twin image disturbance and coherent artifacts', so this approximation is load-bearing.
  • domain assumption The 490 nm long-pass dichroic mirror cleanly separates the 450 nm coherent path from the >490 nm fluorescence emission, so laser light does not contaminate the fluorescence camera.
    The SNR/SBR measurements on fluorescent beads support this for the chosen laser and fluorescein pair, but it is an experimental premise specific to the selected spectral combination.
  • standard math Free-space propagation from the hologram plane to the object plane is correctly modeled by the Rayleigh-Sommerfeld convolution method implemented with three FFTs (Eqs. 1 to 2).
    This is a standard scalar diffraction result used without proof; the numerical implementation is routine.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fluholoscopy. Compact and Simple Platform Combining Fluorescence and Holographic Microscopy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/74YEE7DK

@misc{pith2026250109639,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fluholoscopy. Compact and Simple Platform Combining Fluorescence and Holographic Microscopy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/74YEE7DK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.09639}
}
read the original abstract

The combination of different imaging modalities into single imaging platforms has a strong potential in biomedical sciences since it permits the analysis of complementary properties of the target sample. Here, we report on an extremely simple, cost-effective, and compact microscope platform for achieving simultaneous fluorescence and quantitative phase imaging modes with the capability of working in a single snapshot. It is based on the use of a single illumination wavelength to both excite the sample fluorescence and provide coherent illumination for phase imaging. After passing the microscope layout, the two imaging paths are separated by using a bandpass filter and the two imaging modes are simultaneously obtained by using two digital cameras. We first present calibration and analysis of both fluorescence and phase imaging modalities working independently and, later on, experimental validation for the proposed common-path dual-mode imaging platform considering static (resolution test targets, fluorescent micro-beads and water-suspended lab-made cultures) as well as dynamic (flowing fluorescent beads, human sperm cells and live specimens from lab-made cultures) samples.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.09639 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Phase reconstruction images of the USAF test for three different defocus distances: (a.1) presents the obtained image from best defocus distance while (a.2) show a noise-filtered magnification of the central area with the finest details of the test. The blue dashed line represent the zone where the contrast parameter has been compute, showing the horizontally averaged and normalized phase value across the group at t… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Representation of the resolution obtained from the analysis of the phase test images for different defocus distances in the range 300 µm < ∆ z < 1800 µm (blue dashed line), as well as a contrast parameter calculated on the range where the resolution limit is achieved (red crosses). Continuous lines show quadratic polynomial fits to the respective data. At this point, we could choose a defocus distance around 1100 µm… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Height analysis performed on the group 6 of three different thicknesses (50, 100 and 150 nm nominal heights) for the USAF phase target. (a) Images of the retrieved phase distributions by numerical propagation of the different test targets. (b) Phase profile computed along the dashed marked regions corresponding with elements 2 to 6. Phase step values increase from left image (50 nm) to the right one (150 nm) and the… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Holograms and phase distributions of different samples. (a) Hologram of a low-density water suspended beads sample. (b.1) Phase distribution retrieved by numerical propagation using the defocus distance obtained in calibration while (b.2) and (b.3) show a magnification…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: a shows the stained USAF positive resolution test target. That way, the image is observed in reverse contrast since it is the background itself the one emitting the fluorescent light, contrary to what happens in Fig. 6b where the fluorescent beads are the emitters them…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Simultaneous images of a mid-density water suspended fluorescent beads sample. (a) Direct image from fluorescent emission. (b) Phase distribution retrieved after numerical propagation to the in-focus plane. Scale bars are 50 µm length [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Lab-made cultures cells stained with fluorescein. (a.1) Full field image of the fluorescent arm while (a.2) includes a magnification of a single cell. (b.1) Full field image of the phase distribution while (b.2) and (b.3) depict the magnification of the same single cel…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Movie videos of biological samples with the simultaneously combined image of holography and fluorescence. (a) Visualization of water suspended microorganism (Visualization 7) where left half FOV shows the retrieved phase distribution and right half FOV includes the fl…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Multimodal imaging spectroscopy of tissue

    Vogler, N.; Heuke, S.; Bocklitz, T.W.; Schmitt, M.; Popp, J. Multimodal imaging spectroscopy of tissue. Annual Rev Anal Chem 2015, 8, 359–387

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    NanoCellBiology: Multimodal Imaging in Biology and Medicine, 1st ed.; Pan Stanford Publishing: Penthouse Level, Suntec Tower 3, 8 Temasek Boulevard, Singapur, 2014

    Jena, B.P.; Taatjes, D.J. NanoCellBiology: Multimodal Imaging in Biology and Medicine, 1st ed.; Pan Stanford Publishing: Penthouse Level, Suntec Tower 3, 8 Temasek Boulevard, Singapur, 2014

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    Zhou, Q.; Chen, Z.; Multimodality Imaging: For Intravascular Application, 1st ed.; Springuer: Midtown Manhattan, New York City, United States, 2020

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Sen H.N.; Read, R.W.; Multimodal Imaging in Uveitis, 1st ed.; Springuer: Midtown Manhattan, New York City, United States, 2018

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Deep neural networks for multimodal imaging and biomedical applications, 1st ed.; IGI Global: Pensilvania, United States, 2020

    Suresh, A.; Udendran, R.; Vimal, S. Deep neural networks for multimodal imaging and biomedical applications, 1st ed.; IGI Global: Pensilvania, United States, 2020

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Baz, A.E-.; Suri, J.S.Big Data in Multimodal Medical Imaging, 1st ed.; Chapman Hall: London, Unite Kingdom, 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Label-Free Non-linear Multimodal Optical Microscopy—Basics, Development, and Applications

    Mazumder, N.; Balla, N.K.; Zhuo, G.-Y.; Kistenev, Y.V.; Kumar, R.; Kao,F.-J.; Brasselet, S.; Nikolaev, V.V.; and Krivova, N.A. Label-Free Non-linear Multimodal Optical Microscopy—Basics, Development, and Applications. Front. Phys. 2019, 7, 170

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    and Mazumber, N

    Yu, Z.G-.; Spandana, K.U., Sindhoora, K.M., Kistenev, Y.V.; Kao, F.-J.; Nikolaev, V.V.; Zuhayri, H.; Krivova, A.N. and Mazumber, N. Label-free multimodal nonlinear optical microscopy for biomedical applications. J. Appl. Phys. 2021, 129, 214901

    work page 2021

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    and Mammano, F

    Peres, C.; Nardin,C.; Yang,G. and Mammano, F. Commercially derived versatile optical architecture for two-photon STED, wavelength mixing and label-free microscopy. Biomed. Opt. Express 2022, 13, 1410-1429

    2022

  2. [10]

    Dual-mode optical microscope based on single-pixel imaging

    Rodríguez, A.D.; Clemente, P.; Tajahuerce, E.; Lancis, J. Dual-mode optical microscope based on single-pixel imaging. Opt. Lasers. Eng. 2016, 82, 87-94

    2016

  3. [11]

    and Micó, V

    Picazo-Bueno, J.A.; Cojoc, D.; Iseppon, F.; Torre, V. and Micó, V. Single-shot, dual-mode, water-immersion microscopy platform for biological applications. Appl. Opt. 2018, 57, A242-A249

    2018

  4. [12]

    Repina, N.A

    Yeh, L.-H.; Chowdhury, S. Repina, N.A. and Waller, L. Speckle-structured illumination for 3D phase and fluorescence computa- tional microscopy. Opt. Express. 2019, 10, 3635-3653

    2019

  5. [13]

    On-Chip Cell Staining and Counting Platform for the Rapid Detection of Blood Cells in Cerebrospinal Fluid

    Lee, Y.; Kim, B.; Choi, S. On-Chip Cell Staining and Counting Platform for the Rapid Detection of Blood Cells in Cerebrospinal Fluid. Sensors 2018, 18(4), 1124

    2018

  6. [14]

    Pavillon, N.; Fujita, K.; Smith, N.I.; Multimodal label-free microscopy. J. Innov. Opt. Health Sci. 2014, 7(5), 1330009

    2014

  7. [15]

    Label-Free Molecular Imaging of Biological Cells and Tissues by Linear and Nonlinear Raman Spectroscopic Approaches

    Krafft, C.; Schmitt, M.; Schie, I.W.; Cialla, D.-M.; Matthaus, C.; Bocklitz, T. Label-Free Molecular Imaging of Biological Cells and Tissues by Linear and Nonlinear Raman Spectroscopic Approaches. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2017, 56(16), 4392–4430

    2017

  8. [16]

    Song, J.W.; Kim, J

    Ryu, J.; Kang, U. Song, J.W.; Kim, J. Kim, J.M.; Yoo, H. and Gweon, B. Multimodal microscopy for the simultaneous visualization of five different imaging modalities using a single light source. Biomed. Opt. Express 2021, 12, 5452-5469

    2021

  9. [17]

    and Feld, M.S

    Park, Y.; Popescu, G.; Badizadegan, K.; Dasari, R.R. and Feld, M.S. Diffraction phase and fluorescence microscopy. Opt. Express 2006, 14, 8263-8268

    2006

  10. [18]

    and Rao, D.V.G.L.N

    Yelleswarapu, C.S.; Tipping, M.; Kothapalli, S-.R.; Veraksa, A. and Rao, D.V.G.L.N. Common-path multimodal optical microscopy. Opt. Lett. 2009, 34, 1243-1245

    2009

  11. [19]

    and Awatsuji, Y

    Quan, X.; Nitta, K.; Matoba, O.; Xia, P. and Awatsuji, Y. Phase and fluorescence imaging by combination of digital holographic microscopy and fluorescence microscopy. Opt. Lett. 2015, 22(2), 349–353

    2015

  12. [20]

    and Izatt, J.A

    Chowdhury, S.; Eldridge, W.J.; Wax, A. and Izatt, J.A. Spatial frequency-domain multiplexed microscopy for simultaneous, single-camera, one-shot, fluorescent, and quantitative-phase imaging. Opt. Lett. 2015, 40, 4839-4842

    2015

  13. [21]

    and Izatt, J.A

    Chowdhury, S.; Eldridge, W.J.; Wax, A. and Izatt, J.A. Structured illumination multimodal 3D-resolved quantitative phase and fluorescence sub-diffraction microscopy. Biomed. Opt. Express 2017, 8, 2496-2518

    2017

  14. [22]

    Zhang, G

    Shen, Z.; He, Y. Zhang, G. He, Q. Li, D. and Ji, Y. Dual-wavelength digital holographic phase and fluorescence microscopy for an optical thickness encoded suspension array. Opt. Lett. 2018, 43, 739-742

    2018

  15. [23]

    and Ahluwalia,B.S

    Dubey, V.; Ahmad, A.; Singh, R.; Wolfson, D.L.; Basnet, P.; Acharya, G.; Mehta, D.S. and Ahluwalia,B.S. Multi-modal chip-based fluorescence and quantitative phase microscopy for studying inflammation in macrophages. Opt. Express 2018, 26, 19864-19876

    2018

  16. [24]

    Simultaneous off-axis multiplexed holography and regular fluorescence microscopy of biological cells

    Nygate, Y.N.; Singh, G.; Barnea, I and Shaked, N.T. Simultaneous off-axis multiplexed holography and regular fluorescence microscopy of biological cells. Opt. Lett. 2018, 43, 2587-2590

    2018

  17. [25]

    and Blandin, P

    Kernier, I.D.; Cherif,A.A-.; Rongeat, N.; Cioni, O.; Morales, S.; Savatier, J.; Monneret, S. and Blandin, P. Large field-of-view phase and fluorescence mesoscope with microscopic resolution.J. Biomed. Opt. 2019, 24, 036501

    2019

  18. [26]

    Fiole, D.; Hervé, L.; Blandin, P.; Kraemer, D.C

    Mandula, O.; Kleman, J-.P.; Lacroix, F.; Allier, C. Fiole, D.; Hervé, L.; Blandin, P.; Kraemer, D.C. and Morales, S. Phase and fluorescence imaging with a surprisingly simple microscope based on chromatic aberration.Opt. Express 2020, 28, 2079-2090

    2020

  19. [27]

    and Matoba, O

    Kumar, M.; Quan, X.; Awatsuji, Y.; Tamada, Y. and Matoba, O. Digital holographic multimodal cross-sectional fluorescence and quantitative phase imaging system. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 1–13

    2020

  20. [28]

    and Gao, P

    Wen, K.; Gao, Z.; Fang, X.; Liu, M.; Zheng, J.; Ma, M.; Zalevsky, Z. and Gao, P. Structured illumination microscopy with partially coherent illumination for phase and fluorescent imaging. Opt. Express 2021, 29(21), 33679-33693

    2021

  21. [29]

    and Matoba, O

    Quan, X.; Kumar, M.; Rajput, S.K.; Tamada, Y.; Awatsuji, Y. and Matoba, O. Multimodal microscopy: Fast acquisition of quantitative phase and fluorescence imaging in 3D space. IEEE J. Sel. Topics Quantum Electron 2021, 27(4), 6800911

    2021

  22. [30]

    Liu, P.Y. et al. Cell refractive index for cell biology and disease diagnosis: past, present and future. Lab Chip 2016, 16, 634–644

    2016

  23. [31]

    and Conchello, J.-A

    Lichtman J.W. and Conchello, J.-A. Fluorescence microscopy. Nat. Methods 2005, 2, 910–919

    2005

  24. [32]

    and Picazo-Bueno, J.A

    Micó, V.; Trindade, T. and Picazo-Bueno, J.A. Phase imaging microscopy under the Gabor regime in a minimally modified regular bright-field microscope. Opt. Express 2021, 29(26), 42738-42750

    2021

  25. [33]

    Variational Hilbert quantitative phase imaging

    Trusiak, M.; Cywi n´ ska, M.; Micó, V.; Picazo-Bueno, J.Á.; Zuo, C.; Zdan´ kowski, P.; Patorski, K. Variational Hilbert quantitative phase imaging. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10(1), 13955

    2020

  26. [34]

    Improving signal-to-background ratio by orders of magnitude in high-speed volumetric imaging in vivo by robust Fourier light field microscopy

    Zhai, J.; Shi, R.; Kong, L. Improving signal-to-background ratio by orders of magnitude in high-speed volumetric imaging in vivo by robust Fourier light field microscopy. Photon. Res. 2022, 10, 1255-1263

    2022

  27. [35]

    Wavefront holoscopy: application of digital in-line holography for the inspection of engraved marks in progressive addition lenses J

    Perucho, B.; Micó, V. Wavefront holoscopy: application of digital in-line holography for the inspection of engraved marks in progressive addition lenses J. Biomed. Opt. 2014, 19(1), 016017

    2014

  28. [36]

    Dual mode holographic microscopy imaging platform Lab Chip 2018, 18(7), 1105-1112

    Sanz, M.; Picazo-Bueno, J.A.; García, J.; Micó, V. Dual mode holographic microscopy imaging platform Lab Chip 2018, 18(7), 1105-1112

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.