Re: Quantum yield

Posted by Unruh, Jay on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Rejected-posting-to-CONFOCALMICROSCOPY-LISTS-UMN-EDU-tp6866064p6870373.html

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****

Oops--I accidentally inverted the equation.  It should be QY=QYstandard*(F/Fstandard) *(Astandard/A)*(n^2/nstandard^2).

For quantum yield standards, see Magde et al photochemistry and photobiology 2002 vol 75 p 327.  It gives a thorough study for fluorescein and rhodamine 6G.  Other wavelengths are a bit more difficult.  Lakowicz principles of fluorescence spectroscopy gives more details and a few standards from the literature.

Jay

-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Craig Brideau
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 11:53 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Quantum yield

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****

That's a pretty neat method!  It avoids having to worry about figuring out photon flux by calibrating against a known.  Where would you get trustworthy QE calibration standards though?

Craig

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Unruh, Jay <[hidden email]> wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> In order to measure quantum yields by the reference method, one only
> needs a defined measurement volume, a standard dye of known absorbance
> (at the microscope excitation wavelength) and quantum yield, and the
> absorbance of your sample at the microscope excitation wavelength.  
> Quantum yield is then defined as QY=QYstandard*(A/Astandard) *(Fstandard/F)*(n^2/nstandard^2).
>  Here n is the refractive index, F is the measured fluorescence
> intensity and A is the absorbance at the microscope excitation
> wavelength.  Note that it is important that the standard and your
> unknown have similar emission spectra.  Otherwise you will have to
> correct for the wavelength dependence of your microscope detection
> efficiency.  Of course, if you have enough sample to measure
> absorbance, you can also measure fluorescence in a cuvette and then there is no point in going to the microscope.
>
> Jay
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List
> [mailto:[hidden email]]
> On Behalf Of Guy Cox
> Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 8:44 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Quantum yield
>
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> I got a rather left field enquiry today, as to whether there were
> calibration standards for quantum yield.  It seems that the person
> wants to measure quantum yield under the microscope.  My immediate
> response was that this is impossible.  Quantum yield is easy enough to
> measure in a cuvette but would it be possible in a microscope?  You
> could make a standard of a known concentration of fluorescein in a cell made by a
> spacer under the coverslip, but where do you go from there, if   both
> quantum yield and extinction coefficient of the test sample are unknown?
>
> Any bright ideas?
>
>                                          Guy
>
>
>
>
> Optical Imaging Techniques in Cell Biology
> by Guy Cox    CRC Press / Taylor & Francis
>     http://www.guycox.com/optical.htm
> ______________________________________________
> Associate Professor Guy Cox, MA, DPhil(Oxon) Australian Centre for
> Microscopy & Microanalysis, Madsen Building F09, University of Sydney,
> NSW
> 2006
>
> Phone +61 2 9351 3176     Fax +61 2 9351 7682
>             Mobile 0413 281 861
> ______________________________________________
>      http://www.guycox.net
>
>