Spherical aberration (SA) occurs when light rays entering at different points of a spherical lens are not focused to the same point of the optical axis. SA that occurs inside the lens elements of a fluorescence microscope is well understood and corrected for. However, SA is also induced when light passes through an interface of refractive index (RI)-mismatched substances (i.e., a discrepancy between the RI of the immersion medium and the RI of the sample). SA due to RI mismatches has many deleterious effects on imaging. Perhaps most important for 3D imaging is that the distance the image plane moves in a sample is not equivalent to the distance traveled by an objective (or stage) during z-stack acquisition. This non-uniform translation along the z axis gives rise to artifactually elongated images (if the objective is immersed in a medium with a higher RI than that of the sample) or compressed images (if the objective is immersed in a medium with a lower RI than that of the sample) and alters the optimal axial sampling rate. In this tutorial, we describe why this distortion occurs, how it impacts quantitative measurements and axial resolution, and what can be done to avoid SA and thereby prevent distorted images. In addition, this tutorial aims to better inform researchers of how to correct RI mismatch–induced axial distortions and provides a practical ImageJ/Fiji-based tool to reduce the prevalence of volumetric measurement errors and lost axial resolution.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Open Access articles citing this article.
An open-source semi-automated robotics pipeline for embryo immunohistochemistry
Scientific Reports Open Access 13 May 2021
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 per month
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Get just this article for as long as you need it
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
All original (raw) data are available from the authors upon reasonable request.
All necessary code and instructions for running the axial correction macro are provided in the Supplementary Software and Box 1.
Gibson, S. F. & Lanni, F. Experimental test of an analytical model of aberration in an oil-immersion objective lens used in three-dimensional light microscopy. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 9, 154–166 (1992).
Zhang, Q. et al. Quantitative refractive index distribution of single cell by combining phase-shifting interferometry and AFM imaging. Sci. Rep. 7, 2532 (2017).
Keller, H. E. Objectives for confocal microscopy. in Handbook of Biological Confocal Microscopy (ed Pawley, J. B.) (Springer, 1995).
Jonkman, J., Brown, C. M., Wright, G. D., Anderson, K. I. & North, A. J. Tutorial: guidance for quantitative confocal microscopy. Nat. Protoc. 15, 1585–1611 (2020).
Heine, J. et al. Three dimensional live-cell STED microscopy at increased depth using a water immersion objective. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 053701 (2018).
Schmidt, N. C., Kahms, M., Huve, J. & Klingauf, J. Intrinsic refractive index matched 3D dSTORM with two objectives: comparison of detection techniques. Sci. Rep. 8, 13343 (2018).
Dodt, H. U. et al. Ultramicroscopy: development and outlook. Neurophotonics 2, 041407 (2015).
Engelbrecht, C. J. & Stelzer, E. H. Resolution enhancement in a light-sheet-based microscope (SPIM). Opt. Lett. 31, 1477–1479 (2006).
Ji, N. Adaptive optical fluorescence microscopy. Nat. Methods 14, 374–380 (2017).
Patwary, N., King, S. V., Saavedra, G. & Preza, C. Reducing effects of aberration in 3D fluorescence imaging using wavefront coding with a radially symmetric phase mask. Opt. Express 24, 12905–12921 (2016).
Richardson, D. S. & Lichtman, J. W. Clarifying tissue clearing. Cell 162, 246–257 (2015).
Chung, K. et al. Structural and molecular interrogation of intact biological systems. Nature 497, 332–337 (2013).
Renier, N. et al. iDISCO: a simple, rapid method to immunolabel large tissue samples for volume imaging. Cell 159, 896–910 (2014).
Carlsson, K. The influence of specimen refractive-index, detector signal integration, and nonuniform scan speed on the imaging properties in confocal microscopy. J Microsc.-Oxford 163, 167–178 (1991).
Visser, T. D., Oud, J. L. & Brakenhoff, G. J. Refractive-index and axial distance measurements in 3-D microscopy. Optik 90, 17–19 (1992).
Sheppard, C. J., Gu, M., Brain, K. & Zhou, H. Influence of spherical aberration on axial imaging of confocal reflection microscopy. Appl. Opt. 33, 616–624 (1994).
Hell, S., Reiner, G., Cremer, C. & Stelzer, E. H. K. Aberrations in confocal fluorescence microscopy induced by mismatches in refractive-index. J. Microsc. 169, 391–405 (1993).
Schindelin, J. et al. Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 676–682 (2012).
Schneider, C. A., Rasband, W. S. & Eliceiri, K. W. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 671–675 (2012).
Ghosh, S. & Preza, C. Fluorescence microscopy point spread function model accounting for aberrations due to refractive index variability within a specimen. J. Biomed. Opt. 20, 75003 (2015).
Model, M. A., Fang, J., Yuvaraj, P., Chen, Y. & Zhang Newby, B. M. 3D deconvolution of spherically aberrated images using commercial software. J. Microsc. 241, 94–100 (2011).
Kim, B. & Naemura, T. Blind depth-variant deconvolution of 3D data in wide-field fluorescence microscopy. Sci. Rep. 5, 9894 (2015).
Preza, C. & Conchello, J. A. Depth-variant maximum-likelihood restoration for three-dimensional fluorescence microscopy. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 21, 1593–1601 (2004).
Ghosh, S. & Preza, C. Three-dimensional block-based restoration integrated with wide-field fluorescence microscopy for the investigation of thick specimens with spatially variant refractive index. J. Biomed. Opt. 21, 46010 (2016).
We thank S. Piccinotti and L. Rubin for providing organoid samples. We thank the Harvard Center for Biological Imaging for infrastructure and support. J.W.L. was supported by the following funding sources: National Institutes of Health grants P50 MH094271, U24 NS109102, and U19 NS104653 and Department of Defense MURI award GG008784.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information Nature Protocols thanks Chrysanthe Preza and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References that contributed to the development of this protocol
Visser, T. D. et al. Optik 90, 17–19 (1992): https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285251956_Refractive_index_and_axial_distance_measurements_in_3-D_microscopy
Hell, S., Reiner, G., Cremer, C. & Stelzer, E. H. K. J. Microsc. 169, 391–405, (1993): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2818.1993.tb03315.x
Supplementary Methods and Supplementary Notes 1 and 2.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Diel, E.E., Lichtman, J.W. & Richardson, D.S. Tutorial: avoiding and correcting sample-induced spherical aberration artifacts in 3D fluorescence microscopy. Nat Protoc 15, 2773–2784 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-020-0360-2
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.