Premium
Evaluation of several common standards for the X‐ray microanalysis of thin biological specimens
Author(s) -
PATAK A.,
WRIGHT A.,
MARSHALL A. T.
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
journal of microscopy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.569
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1365-2818
pISSN - 0022-2720
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2818.1993.tb03350.x
Subject(s) - microanalysis , thin film , epoxy , composition (language) , bromine , materials science , analytical chemistry (journal) , polymer , matrix (chemical analysis) , chemistry , mineralogy , composite material , nanotechnology , chromatography , organic chemistry , metallurgy , linguistics , philosophy
Summary The question of the best type of standard to use for X‐ray microanalysis of thin biological specimens remains unanswered. Standards embedded in an organic matrix have the advantage that they resemble biological specimens, but their composition is generally not known exactly. We compared several standards and, surprisingly, inorganic binary salts sprayed onto a supporting film were the most suitable: they corresponded closely with several other methods using organic matrices; they were easily produced; and their composition is known. Glutaraldehydeurea aminoplastic resin thin sections and thin films containing dissolved salts were problematic. The composition of the polymer appears to be variable, and the thin films did not correspond with any other standard tested. Chelex 100 bio‐standard beads and flakes loaded with accurately determined concentrations of ions, embedded in epoxy resin and thin sectioned, tended to correspond to the results obtained with the binary salts. However, the results from some bio‐standards were inexplicably aberrant. An epoxy resin standard was used for bromine, and was found to agree closely with the binary standards.