Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T00:28:02.346Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Microscopy of Muscle in the 19th and 20th Centuries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

Andrew F. Huxley*
Affiliation:
Trinity College, Cambridge
*
(correspondence to: 1 Vicarage Drive, Grantchester, CAMBRIDGE, CB3 9NGUK)
Get access

Extract

In the 19th century, the microscope was the principal tool of biologists. The ordinary light microscope is designed to work on specimens that absorb light, but most unstained biological specimens do not absorb light appreciably and almost nothing is visible when such a specimen is viewed with the full aperture of the objective illuminated. However, they do show appreciable differences of refractive index, corresponding to variation in the concentration of solids, and the 19th century microscopists understood how to interpret the image when these were made visible by reducing the illuminating aperture and going slightly out of focus. If the objective is brought closer to the specimen (low focus), regions with high refractive index appear dark (positive image), and it became customary to use this setting, as in Fig. l (upper). As a result, the A bands of striated muscle fibres, with refractive index higher than the I bands, came to be known as the dark bands, although they appear bright with high focus.

Type
Philadelphia—The Other Motor City: Muscle and Non-Muscle Motility. A Dedication to Dr. Lee Peachey
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Fredericq, L.. Bull. Acad. roy. Belg., ser. 2, 41 (1876) 583.Google Scholar
Holz, B.. Pfügers Arch. ges. Physiol. 230 (1932) 246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huxley, A.F.. J. Physiol. 117 (1952) 52P.Google Scholar
Huxley, A.F.. J. Physiol. 125 (1954) 11P.Google Scholar
Huxley, A.F. & Niedergerke, R.. Nature 173 (1054) 971; J. Physiol. 144 (1958) 403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huxley, H.E.. Biochim. biophys. Acta 12 (1953) 387; H.E. Huxley & J. Hanson. Nature 173 (1954) 973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huxley, A.F.. Brit. Med. Bull. 12, 3 (1956) 167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar