Pflügers Archiv

, Volume 390, Issue 1, pp 54–55 | Cite as

Electron probe analysis of microdroplets

Effect of low temperatures on the stability of characteristic signals
  • Nicole Roinel
  • Pierre Malorey
Transport Processes, Metabolism and Endocrinology; Kidney, Gastrointestinal Tract, and Exocrine Glands


The effect of low temperatures on the stability of characteristic signals during electron probe analysis of microdroplets has been investigated. The kinetics of the characteristic Na, K and Cl signals from lyophilized droplets of either KCl or NaCl salts were observed for 1200 s within an electron microprobe whose specimen stage was maintained at −140°C. Samples were irradiated with 15 keV electrons, at beam current densities ranging from 7×10−4 to 7×10−3 A · cm−2. The signals measured increased and then, in some cases, decreased. The duration and amplitude of the increases varied depending on beam current density, mass thickness of the sample and on the element concerned. The increase sometimes reached 6 times the initial value, a level never observed at room temperature. No proportionality was observed between X-ray intensity and concentration for measurements after the first 10 s irradiation. Proportionality was only restored when droplets had been irradiated for some time. In no case did the stability of characteristic signals improve. Analysis of droplets at −140°C suggests that under electron beam irradiation they undergo a change not observable at room temperature.

Key words

Electron probe analysis Droplets Cold stage Variations in signals 


  1. 1.
    Beeuwkes R, Amberg JM, Essandoh L (1977) Urea measurements by X-ray microanalysis in 50 picoliter specimens. Kidney Int 12:438–442Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Garland HO, Hopkins TC, Henderson IW, Haworth CW, Chester-Jones I (1973) The application of quantitative electron probe microanalysis to renal micropuncture studies in amphibians. Micron 4:164–176Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garland HO, Brown JA, Henderson IW (1978) X-Ray analysis applied to the study of renal tubular fluid samples. In: Eramus D (ed) Electron probe microanalysis in biology. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 212–241Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Glaeser RM (1978) Radiation damage and biological electron microscopy. In: Siegel BM, Beaman DR (eds) Physical aspects of electron microscopy and microbeam analysis. Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 205–229Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Greger R, Lang F, Knox FG, Lechene C (1978) Analysis of tubule fluid. In: Martinez-Maldonado M (ed) Methods in pharmacology. vol. 4B, renal pharmacology, Plenum Press, New York, pp 105–140Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ingram MJ, Hogben CA (1967) Electrolyte analysis of biological fluids with the electron microprobe. Anal Biochem 18:54–57Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Leroy AF, Roinel N (1980) Quantitative analysis of solutions: loss of elements during the irradiation time as a function of sample current density and mass thickness. In: Brederoo P, Cosslett VE (eds) Electron microscopy 1980. Vol 3, Seventh European Congress on Electron Microscopy Fondation, Leiden pp 161–162Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lechene C (1974) Electron probe microanalysis of picoliter liquid samples. In: Hall T, Echlin P, Kaufmann R (eds) Microprobe analysis as applied to cells and tissues. Academic Press, London, pp 351–367Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Martoja R, Ballan-Dufrançais C, Roinel N (1979) Echantillons biologiques: préparation et analyse. In: Maurice F, Meny L, Tixier R (eds) Ecole d'été de microanalyse et de microscopie à balayage. Société Française de Physique, Paris, pp 361–380Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Morel F, Roinel N (1969) Application de la microsonde électronique à l'analyse élémentaire quantitative d'échantillons liquides d'un volume inférieur à 10−9 l. J Chim Physique 66:1084–1091Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Quinton PM (1978) Ultramicroanalysis of biological fluids with energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry. Micron 9:57–69Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reimer L (1978) Review of the radiation damage problem of organic specimens in electron microscopy. In: Siegel BM, Beaman DR (eds) Physical aspects of electron microscopy and microbeam analysis. Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 231–245Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rick R, Horster M, Dörge A, Thurau K (1977) Determination of electrolytes in small biological fluid samples using dispersive X-ray microanalysis. Pflügers Arch 239:95–98Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roinel N (1975) Electron microprobe quantitative analysis of lyophilized 10−10 J volume samples. J Microsc (Paris) 22:261–268Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roinel N, Meny L, Henoc J (1980) Accuracy of electron microprobe analysis of biological fluids. Choice of standard solutions and range of linearity of the calibration curves. US Department of Commerce, NBS, special publication 533Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicole Roinel
    • 1
  • Pierre Malorey
    • 1
  1. 1.Département de Biologie/LPPCCentre d'Etudes Nucléaires de SaclayGif-sur Yvette CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations