ArticleJournal of microscopy2026
A comparison of super-resolution microscopy techniques for imaging tightly packed microcolonies of an obligate intracellular bacterium.
Article in Journal of microscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Conventional optical microscopy imaging of obligate intracellular bacteria is hampered by the small size of bacterial cells, tight clustering exhibited by some bacterial species and challenges relating to labelling such as background from host cells, a lack of validated reagents, and a lack of tools for genetic manipulation. In this study, we imaged intracellular bacteria from the species Orientia tsutsugamushi (Ot) using five different fluorescence microscopy techniques: standard confocal, Airyscan confocal, instant Structured Illumination Microscopy (iSIM), three-dimensional Structured Illumination Microscopy (3D-SIM) and Stimulated Emission Depletion Microscopy (STED). We compared the ability of each to resolve bacterial cells in intracellular clumps in the lateral (xy) axis, using full width half-maximum (FWHM) measurements of a labelled outer membrane protein (ScaA) and the ability to detect small, outer membrane vesicles external to the cells. Comparing the techniques readily available to us (above), 3D-SIM microscopy, in combination with the shortest-wavelength dyes, was found overall to give the best lateral resolution. We next compared the ability of each technique to sufficiently resolve bacteria in the axial (z) direction and found 3D-STED to be the most successful method for this. We then combined this 3D-STED approach with a custom 3D cell segmentation and analysis pipeline using the open-source, deep learning software, Cellpose to segment the cells and subsequently the commercial software Imaris to analyse their 3D shape and size. Using this combination, we demonstrated differences in bacterial shape, but not their size, when grown in different mammalian cell lines. Overall, we compare the advantages and disadvantages of different super-resolution microscopy techniques for imaging this cytoplasmic obligate intracellular bacterium based on the specific research question being addressed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.