The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Visualisation of natural aquatic colloids and particles – a comparison of conventional high vacuum and environmental scanning electron microscopy

Visualisation of natural aquatic colloids and particles – a comparison of conventional high vacuum and environmental scanning electron microscopy
Visualisation of natural aquatic colloids and particles – a comparison of conventional high vacuum and environmental scanning electron microscopy
The applicability of environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM; imaging of hydrated samples) and conventional high vacuum scanning electron microscopy (SEM; imaging of dried samples at high vacuum) for the observation of natural aquatic colloids and particles was explored and compared. Specific attention was given to the advantages and limitations of these two techniques when used to assess the sizes and morphologies of complex and heterogeneous environmental systems. The observation of specimens using SEM involved drying and coating, whereas ESEM permitted their examination in hydrated form without prior sample preparation or conductive coating. The two techniques provided significantly different micrographs of the same sample. SEM provided sharper images, lower resolution limits (10 nm or lower), but more densely packed particles, suggesting aggregation, and different morphological features than ESEM, suggesting artefacts due to drying. ESEM produced less easily visualised materials, more complex interpretation, slightly higher resolution limits (30–50 nm), but these limitations were more than compensated for by the fact that ESEM samples retained, at least to some extent, their morphological integrity. The results in this paper show that SEM and ESEM should be regarded as complementary techniques for the study of aquatic colloids and particles and that ESEM should be more widely applied to aquatic environmental systems than hitherto.
1464-0325
115-121
Doucet, F.J.
5d604100-cca3-4fe4-8f73-160b55c2c897
Lead, J.R.
c59c95bd-a83e-4c66-8678-2e50d28b7090
Maguire, L.
098b9790-248b-486f-bd53-f356ec1772cf
Achterberg, E.P.
685ce961-8c45-4503-9f03-50f6561202b9
Millward, G.E.
723dc5eb-bbd3-463f-8485-4291c329f96b
Doucet, F.J.
5d604100-cca3-4fe4-8f73-160b55c2c897
Lead, J.R.
c59c95bd-a83e-4c66-8678-2e50d28b7090
Maguire, L.
098b9790-248b-486f-bd53-f356ec1772cf
Achterberg, E.P.
685ce961-8c45-4503-9f03-50f6561202b9
Millward, G.E.
723dc5eb-bbd3-463f-8485-4291c329f96b

Doucet, F.J., Lead, J.R., Maguire, L., Achterberg, E.P. and Millward, G.E. (2005) Visualisation of natural aquatic colloids and particles – a comparison of conventional high vacuum and environmental scanning electron microscopy. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 7 (2), 115-121. (doi:10.1039/b413832e).

Record type: Article

Abstract

The applicability of environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM; imaging of hydrated samples) and conventional high vacuum scanning electron microscopy (SEM; imaging of dried samples at high vacuum) for the observation of natural aquatic colloids and particles was explored and compared. Specific attention was given to the advantages and limitations of these two techniques when used to assess the sizes and morphologies of complex and heterogeneous environmental systems. The observation of specimens using SEM involved drying and coating, whereas ESEM permitted their examination in hydrated form without prior sample preparation or conductive coating. The two techniques provided significantly different micrographs of the same sample. SEM provided sharper images, lower resolution limits (10 nm or lower), but more densely packed particles, suggesting aggregation, and different morphological features than ESEM, suggesting artefacts due to drying. ESEM produced less easily visualised materials, more complex interpretation, slightly higher resolution limits (30–50 nm), but these limitations were more than compensated for by the fact that ESEM samples retained, at least to some extent, their morphological integrity. The results in this paper show that SEM and ESEM should be regarded as complementary techniques for the study of aquatic colloids and particles and that ESEM should be more widely applied to aquatic environmental systems than hitherto.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 2005

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 38096
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/38096
ISSN: 1464-0325
PURE UUID: 2844bbb9-7dd8-449a-96af-76211ec79f2e

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 01 Jun 2006
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 08:03

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: F.J. Doucet
Author: J.R. Lead
Author: L. Maguire
Author: E.P. Achterberg
Author: G.E. Millward

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×