Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T00:12:23.240Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The BNL STEM Facility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

Joseph S. Wall
Affiliation:
Biology Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY11973
Martha N. Simon
Affiliation:
Biology Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY11973
James F. Hainfeld
Affiliation:
Biology Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY11973
Get access

Extract

The STEM facility at Brookhaven National Laboratory has been in operation since Oct. ‘77, using a custom-built instrument (STEM1) with cold field emission source, 2.5Å probe, -150°C cold stage, efficient dark field detectors and computer control & data acquisition system. A specimen changing air lock and several portable vacuum chambers permit vacuum transfer of specimens from a separate vacuum system where they were freeze dried overnight.

The large angle dark-field signal produced by the STEM is directly proportional to the total mass within the probed area. STEM mass mapping is based on this linear relationship and the fact that only specimen-specific atoms remain on the substrate after washing with volatile buffer and freeze drying. All images are digital and available via Internet. PC software can be provided for analysis.

STEM mass accuracy ranges from a fraction of a percent on well-defined individual particles such as viruses in the 50 MDa to 10 GDa range, to ∼1% around 1 MDa and ∼10% in the 50 kDa range.

Type
Shared Resources: Access to Critical Instrumentation
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Wall, J. S., et al. In Berrios, M. (Ed.), Methods in Cell Biology (1997) in press. Acad. Press.Google Scholar
2.Blackwell, L. J., et al.Mol. Cell Biol. 16 (1996) 4798.10.1128/MCB.16.9.4798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Cerritelli, M. E. & Studier, F. W., J. Mol. Biol. 258 (1996) 286.10.1006/jmbi.1996.0250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Cerritelli, M. E., et al.J. Mol. Biol. 260 (1996) 767.10.1006/jmbi.1996.0436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Crevel, G., et al.J. Struct. Biol. 118 (1997) 9.10.1006/jsbi.1996.3836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Gregori, L., et al., J. Biol. Chem. 272 (1997) 58.10.1074/jbc.272.1.58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Ksiezak-Reding, H., et al., Am. J. Path. 149(1996) 639.Google Scholar
8.Lin, H., et al., J. Biol. Chem. 272 (1997) 3495.10.1074/jbc.272.6.3495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Mosesson, M. W., et al., J. Clin. Invest. 97 (1996) 2342.10.1172/JCI118677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Sharma, P. K., et al., J. Biol. Chem. 271 (1996) 8754.10.1074/jbc.271.15.8754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Yu, X., el al., J. Mol. Biol. 259(1996) 7.10.1006/jmbi.1996.0297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Supported by NIH Biotechnology Resources P41-RR01777 and USDOE OHER.Google Scholar