Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,194

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The potential and limitations of neutrons, electrons and X-rays for atomic resolution microscopy of unstained biological molecules

Henderson, Richard·1995·Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics

Abstract

Summary: Radiation damage is the main problem which prevents the determination of the structure of a single biological macromolecule at atomic resolution using any kind of microscopy. This is true whether neutrons, electrons or X-rays are used as the illumination. For neutrons, the cross-section for nuclear capture and the associatedenergy deposition and radiation damage could be reduced by using samples that are fully deuterated and 15 N-labelled and by using fast neutrons, but single molecule biological microscopy is still not feasible. For naturally occurring biological material,electrons at present provide the most information for a given amount of radiation damage. Using phase contrast electron microscopy on biological molecules and macromolecular assemblies of ˜ 10 5 molecular weight and above, there is in theory enough information present in the image to allow determination of the position and orientation of individual particles: the application of averaging methods can then be used to provide an atomic resolution structure. The images of approximately 10000 particles are required. Below 10 5 molecular weight, some kind of crystal or other geometrically ordered aggregate is necessary to provide a sufficiently high combined molecular weight to allow for the alignment. In practice, the present quality of the best images still falls short of that attainable in theory and this means that a greater number of particles must be averaged and that the molecular weight limitation is somewhat larger than the predicted limit. For X-rays, the amount of damage per useful elastic scattering event is several hundred times greater than for electrons at all wavelengths and energies and therefore the requirements on specimen size and number of particles are correspondingly larger. Because of the lack of sufficiently bright neutron sources in the foreseeable future, electron microscopy in practice provides the greatest potential for immediate progress.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s003358350000305x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,194

Metadata

Authors
Henderson, R.
Venue
Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics
Published
1995-05
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
171-193
ISSN
  • 0033-5835 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8994
OpenAlex
W2149705812
Cited by
1,194
References
0
FWCI
2.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The potential and limitations of neutrons, electrons and X-rays for atomic resolution microscopy of unstained biological molecules. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s003358350000305x
The paper
Henderson, R. (1995). The potential and limitations of neutrons, electrons and X-rays for atomic resolution microscopy of unstained biological molecules. Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s003358350000305x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.