journal article·2020-11

Quantitative Polarization‐Resolved Second‐Harmonic‐Generation Microscopy of Glycine Microneedles

Matthew Gleeson, Kevin O'Dwyer, Sarah Guerin, Daragh Rice, Damien Thompson, Syed A. M. Tofail, Christophe Silien, Ning Liu

Advanced Materials· Volume 32· Issue 46
Publisher page

Abstract

Abstract Second‐harmonic generation (SHG) is a nonlinear optical process that can provide disease diagnosis through characterization of biological building blocks such as amino acids, peptides, and proteins. The second‐order nonlinear susceptibility tensor χ(2) of a material characterizes its tendency to cause SHG. Here, a method for finding the χ(2) elements from polarization‐resolved SHG microscopy in transmission mode is presented. The quantitative framework and analytical approach that corrects for micrometer‐scale morphology and birefringence enable the determination and comparison of the SHG susceptibility tensors of β‐ and γ‐phase glycine microneedles. The maximum nonlinear susceptibility coefficients are d33 = 15 pm V−1 for the β and d33 = 5.9 pm V−1 for the γ phase. The results demonstrate glycine as a useful biocompatible nonlinear material. This combination of the analytical model and polarization‐resolved SHG transmission microscopy is broadly applicable for quantitative SHG material characterization and diagnostic imaging.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Advanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques · Spectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical Research · Spectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Physics and Bernal Institute University of Limerick Castletroy, Co. Limerick Limerick V94 T9PX Ireland

Funding

Science Foundation Ireland · Irish Research Council · European Regional Development Fund

References (30)

Show source-provided references
1. Mutailipu M. · Acc. Chem. Res. · 2019 · 3 · 79110.1021/acs.accounts.8b00649 ↗
2. 10.1515/nanoph-2016-000310.1515/nanoph-2016-0003 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2005.03.07410.1016/j.jcrysgro.2005.03.074 ↗
4. 10.1038/nprot.2012.00910.1038/nprot.2012.009 ↗
5. 10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b0408710.1021/acs.nanolett.6b04087 ↗
6. 10.1038/lsa.2016.4010.1038/lsa.2016.40 ↗
7. 10.1021/acs.accounts.6b0020910.1021/acs.accounts.6b00209 ↗
8. 10.1038/nmat320010.1038/nmat3200 ↗
9. 10.1038/nmat504510.1038/nmat5045 ↗
10. 10.1021/ac103232510.1021/ac1032325 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.optmat.2018.04.05110.1016/j.optmat.2018.04.051 ↗
12. 10.1021/cg500747x10.1021/cg500747x ↗
13. 10.1021/acs.cgd.5b0018710.1021/acs.cgd.5b00187 ↗
14. 10.1023/A:101317970273010.1023/A:1013179702730 ↗
15. 10.1021/cg200933610.1021/cg2009336 ↗
16. 10.1021/cg500111a10.1021/cg500111a ↗
17. 10.1016/j.optmat.2017.07.00710.1016/j.optmat.2017.07.007 ↗
18. 10.1039/C5TC00226E10.1039/C5TC00226E ↗
19. 10.1364/AO.57.00591410.1364/AO.57.005914 ↗
20. 10.1117/1.277231110.1117/1.2772311 ↗
21. 10.1364/OE.18.01933910.1364/OE.18.019339 ↗
22. Jatirian‐Foltides E. · Rev. Mex. Fis. E · 2016 · 62 · 5
23. Jackson J. D. · 1975
24. 10.1016/j.optmat.2014.09.00710.1016/j.optmat.2014.09.007 ↗
25. 10.1093/oso/9780198520757.001.000110.1093/oso/9780198520757.001.0001 ↗
26. Xin Y. · J. Opt. Soc. Am. B · 2005 · 22 · 218510.1364/JOSAB.22.002185 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.optmat.2018.06.01010.1016/j.optmat.2018.06.010 ↗
28. 10.1021/acs.cgd.6b0163310.1021/acs.cgd.6b01633 ↗
29. 10.1007/s10853-018-03211-y10.1007/s10853-018-03211-y ↗
30. 10.1039/C4CE01429D10.1039/C4CE01429D ↗