The Magazine

Today we celebrate the download of the 500th MicrobeHunter magazine, and I expect the download frequency to go up with every issue.

Currently I’m working on the next issue (for Feb. 2011), which will be released around January 20th, 2011. At this point, I would also like to thank those people who have sent in contributions. It is the active participation of the microscopy community which makes a magazine like this interesting and diverse (articles that I receive later than middle of January, I’ll include in the March issue – Read the submissions page for more info.)

Facebook page

Followers of the MicrobeHunter Facebook page will also have noticed that I’m now posting a microscopy-related link every day. I encourage everyone to post comments to the Facebook wall as well. If you want to receive and automatic status update, then click on the “like” button.

There is another newly established Microscopy Facebook page, that you may be interested in.

The Forum

As of now, there are 19 registered members in the forum, with a total of 82 posts. After a slow start, the forum is now also starting to take off, and I hope that it becomes a platform for interesting conversations.

The Website

I now added a microscope supplies page to the main menu. It contains a list of microscopy-related products that can be purchased over Amazon.com.

Guest Bloggers

If there is anyone interested also in contributing guest blogs, then please contact me. The blog and the magazine should be a platform for microscopy-fans of all levels to exchange their experience and enthusiasm.

Estimating the number of cells should, mathematically, not be too difficult: We assume that an average eukaryotic cell is about 10 micro meters across. Further, we assume that a human cell is a cube. We calculate the volume, and then assume that the density of the cell is about like the density of water. This way we can compute the mass of a cell. You then simply weigh the organism, and multiply this mass by the number of cells in one kg, and voila: you have the number of cells in the body.

• Diameter of a cell: 10 micro meters (microns)
• Volume of a cell: 10x10x10 cubic microns = 1000 cubic microns
• If there are a billion (10⁹) cubic microns in a cubic mm, then this means that there are a million cells in a cubic mm.
• Consequently, there are a million million (10¹²) cells in a cubic decimeter (1dm³ = one liter). This happens to be one trillion cells in one liter of volume.
• We assume that 1 liter is about 1kg, assuming the density of water. There are therefore 10¹² cells in one kg.
• If we assume that the person has a mass of 80kg, then we obtain: 80×10¹² cells, this is 80 trillion cells.

This is a more than the estimated 10 trillion, but considering the wide range of cell sizes, I think it’s still an acceptable answer… But then again, what does a number like this really mean to 8 year-olds? What does 10 trillion mean to me? We simply lack every day experience with numbers of this scale.

Back to the original question: “How many cells are there in a 9-year old tree, in a flower and in an elephant?” The elephant one is easy to answer, if one knows the mass of an elephant. An elephant masses 7.5 tons (7500 kg), and is therefore 100 times heavier than a person. We therefore assume that it also contains 100 times more cells. If a human has 10 trillion cells (depending on the estimate), then this would account for 1000 trillion cells in an elephant.This is one quadrillion cells (10¹⁵). Maybe the kids are more interested in the names of these numbers than in the actual cell count…

But don’t forget that there are more prokaryotes (bacteria) growing on your body and in the digestive system than we have body cells. After all, they are about 1000x smaller in volume. Now things are really starting to become interesting. Just my 2 cents.

Strengths and opportunities of microscopy

• School labs: Many biology labs of schools already possess microscopes. How many schools, in comparison, possess telescopes? Microscopes are more accessible to students. The question is now what should be done to foster and retain the interest of the students?
• Comparatively low cost: Reasonable microscopes can be bought for a quite reasonable price. The financial entry barrier into recreational microscopy is not high.
• Location, weather and time independence: There is no need for a clear sky and microscopic specimens can be observed around the clock.
• Many samples: A nearly unlimited number of samples that can be observed. Specimen preparation can be very simple ranging to quite complex. This offers many opportunities for the hobbyist.
• Photography: The observations can be documented using cameras and shared over the Internet. While photography can also be done in astronomy, the equipment costs and experience required can be much higher.

Areas of improvement

• Lack of awareness of stereo microscopes: Many beginning microscopists will think of compound microscopes when they think of a microscope. Stereo microscopes pose an even lower entry-barrier, especially for children. Stereo microscopes are often cheaper and elaborate sample preparation is not necessary.
• Problems of discoveries: An amateur astronomer who discovers a new comet (or other astronomical event) will receive credit for this discovery. Microscopy alone is rarely sufficient to justify the new discovery of a species. Genetic and biochemical tests are also necessary and this is often outside the scope of an amateur. For this reason, I think that amateur microscopy somewhat lacks competitiveness. Many hobbies are supported by the fact that people are able to “build up” something, collect awards and are able to participate in competitions. While this competitive aspect may not be in everyone’s interest, I think that competitiveness can still carry forward and support a hobby.
• Possible negative associations: Microscopy may be negatively associated with germs and pathogens. Microscopes may have the “hospital taste” attached to them.
• Amateur microscope making and technical tinkering: There are not many possibilities to “tune” a microscope. Microscopy is therefore mostly an observing activity, of using a ready-made technical device. Flying model airplanes, for example, contains both aspects the technical construction and then the flying of the model. Also amateur telescope making is able to combine both aspects. In microscopy it is possible to prepare specimens, but this activity is largely non-technical and routine.
• Toxic chemicals: many substances used for specimen preparation are toxic, expensive, or sold only to qualified laboratories. There is a need for safe microscopic methods.

What (Biology) teachers need

• Student-proof methods: Many specimen preparation techniques use methods and chemicals that are not suitable for classroom use. The reagents may be toxic, the methods too complex or time-consuming, or they may require sophisticated equipment. How should a teacher teach a class of 20+ students to use use a microtome, if there are only 1 or 2 of these available? What about the associated dangers? Additionally, some methods may require substantial experience and trial-and-error until a satisfactory specimen is obtained for observation. This time is often simply not available in schools. Student motivation may also be at risk, if a certain preparatory step has to be repeated several times until a satisfactory result is obtained. Being a teacher myself, I found it easiest to work with ready made permanent slides.
• Observation and project ideas: Teachers need straight-forward observation ideas. One reason why the microscopy of onion cells (and onion cell plasmolysis) is so popular in schools is, that the preparation is simple, relatively safe and can be completed and observed within one class period. Teachers need more observation ideas.
• Integration into the curriculum: Practical microscopy work must/should fit into the Biology curriculum. What specimens should/could be observed for the curriculum topic digestion? For the topic nervous system? Some commercial permanent slide sets for schools already contain specimens from a variety of different sources, so that it becomes easier to find appropriate specimens for the different curriculum topics.

What advanced recreational microscopists need

• Validation methods and integration into mainstream research science: An amateur astronomer, who discovers an asteroid can easily validate the discovery against a database and then receives credit for the discovery. What should an amateur microscopist do with his or her observations? Microscopic images are rarely enough to justify the discovery of a new species Amateur astonomers can hunt for supernovae in distant galaxies and search for near-earth asteroids. In my opinion (please correct me), amateur microscopists do not seem to be integrated into mainstream research science to the same extent. A possible reason could be that modem biological research does not rely as much on the more qualitative observations as it once used to. There was a shift towards molecular and biochemical analyses in the bio sciences.
• Competitiveness: To some extent this already exists in micrograph competitions. While competitions are not something for everyone, some amateur microscopists may still be motivated by matching their skills with others. At this point, I do want to recommend Nikon Small World, which is a step into the right direction.

What beginning recreational microscopists need

• Information: Buying a new microscope is not easy, if one does not know what to look out for. Beginners need accessible and non-technical information. Regrettably there are not many amateur microscopy magazines around that contain advertisements for suitable microscopes or other general information for beginners.
• Source of reagents: Stains and other chemicals may need to be obtained from chemical supply companies. These companies often do not target amateurs and may refuse to send these substances to private individuals.
• Networks and clubs: In many areas it seems to be easier to find an astronomy club compared to microscopy clubs. I wonder why considering the fact that a decent telescope can cost substantially more than a microscope.

  Do you have any suggestions? Write a comment!

  ]]> http://www.microbehunter.com/2010/10/03/some-thoughts-on-recreational-amateur-microscopy-part-2/feed/ 2 http://www.microbehunter.com/2010/09/26/introducing-the-microscopy-forum/ http://www.microbehunter.com/2010/09/26/introducing-the-microscopy-forum/#comments Sun, 26 Sep 2010 10:00:26 +0000 Oliver http://www.microbehunter.com/?p=2570 I’ve now installed a microscopy forum which adds an extra level of organization by pre-defining certain categories. It is also not necessary to register in order to use the forum.

  While mailing list services (such as the amateur microscopy group in Yahoo Groups) is a great installment, I found it difficult to find things that I’m looking for. This is due to the organization of the mailing list. There are individual threads and as soon as the discussion of a topic is finished, the thread starts to move into the background and quickly disappears out of sight.

  It can take time until there are enough forum posts. I therefore encourage everyone to contribute to the forum, to make it an active platform for enthusiast microscopists.

  ]]> http://www.microbehunter.com/2010/09/26/introducing-the-microscopy-forum/feed/ 1 http://www.microbehunter.com/2010/09/12/some-thoughts-on-recreational-amateur-microscopy/ http://www.microbehunter.com/2010/09/12/some-thoughts-on-recreational-amateur-microscopy/#comments Sun, 12 Sep 2010 10:00:26 +0000 Oliver http://www.microbehunter.com/?p=1519 Amatuer Microscopy and Amateur Astronomy

  I don’t know how many of you still remember comet Hale-Bopp, which became visible back in 1996-97. The comet was the incentive for me to become involved in amateur astronomy. The Internet, at that time, was still young and for this reason I obtained most of the info about the comet from astronomy magazines that I bought at the magazine store located in the local train station. I remember, that there were about 5-7 different astronomy magazines (in several languages) in the shop. The range was quite impressive: Some magazines were quite advanced and scientific. Others were much more down-to-earth, targeting readers interested in a more casual and popular approach. I scrutinized them in detail, and found one which had the right mix between science and hands-on advice and one which was just right for beginners. I subscribed to the magazine, looked at the ads, and mail-ordered a small telescope. I became a star-gazer. Together with two other friends, I spent many hours in the cold night looking at the stars and trying to identify them with the help of a star chart. We had a great time. And I remember that I was even crazy enough to keep a diary of my observations.

  Just one year later, in 1998, I also got involved with amateur microscopy and spent a little fortune on a compound microscope. This was not the first time for me to use microscopes, I did quite a bit of bright-field and phase-contrast work during my university studies, mostly in the field of bacteriology. At that time I used different staining techniques to characterize the bacteria that we isolated, to help us in the identification process. At the end of my studies, I decided to continue microscopy as a hobby and to broaden my microscopic endeavors into exploring my surroundings. I obtained water samples, looked at the algae, purified diatoms, photographed the crystallization of Vitamin C and citric acid. I also made video recordings of these events and had some nice educational material. But this is a different story.

  I quickly realized that the life of a recreational microscopist resembles the life of a “lone wolf”. Microscopy magazines with a recreational approach are scarce, at least I could find none of them in the magazine shop. Many science journals from the university library did address a range of microscopy-related issues, but the topics were far too specific and not understandable to someone without a scientific background in the particular research area. In many cases the topics revolved around more advanced electron microscopic techniques – interesting, for certain, provided that you understood the science behind it. Very few magazines had the “amateur-approach” of astronomy magazines. In particular, nice colorful pictures were missing.

  Naturally I do understand that there is a fundamental difference between true science journals and “recreational” magazines, which can be bought in a magazine shop. A notable exception is the German microscopy magazine Mikrokosmos, which tries to place a stronger focus on the “observation” aspect. The online magazine Micscape also goes into this direction. Just a pity that they don’t also offer a nicely formatted PDF version (I’d even be willing to pay for one, if it’s not too expensive).

  Now why is this? Why is there such an imbalance between amateur microscopy and astronomy? Does it have historic reasons? Maybe the entry barrier into amateur astronomy is higher (equipment costs, knowledge required etc.) and therefore the support by astronomy clubs and organizations may be more important than for microscopy. Maybe these organizations helped to promote and support amateur astronomy over many years and there is a stronger tradition and community. Or could it be, that there are indeed many amateur microscopists around, but that they are simply not organized into clubs and therefore not visible to the public? But even if this were the case, there should be many amatuer microscopy magazines around, which is not the case.

  Maybe microscopes simply do not offer as many possibilities for the technical tinkerer as telescopes. Amateur telescope making seems to be so popular that this activity even has its own acronym: “ATM”. Try to Google “amateur microscope making”, and you will be awarded with an astonishing 2 hits (yes this is two). The search string “amateur telescope making” gives you 30900 hits (August 2010). OK, maybe this comparison is a bit unfair, considering the fact that quite usable microscopes can already be obtained for a comparatively low price, but the discrepancy is startling nevertheless. Still, I recommend this link here, it’s pretty good http://www.funsci.com/fun3_en/ucomp1/ucomp1.htm

  In any case, I’ll continue to publish my thoughts on this issue and encourage you to write a comment.

  ]]> http://www.microbehunter.com/2010/09/12/some-thoughts-on-recreational-amateur-microscopy/feed/ 2 http://www.microbehunter.com/2010/01/04/what-in-the-world-is-microbe-hunting/ http://www.microbehunter.com/2010/01/04/what-in-the-world-is-microbe-hunting/#comments Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:18:53 +0000 Oliver http://www.microbehunter.com/?p=1427 A quick Google search of the term “microbe hunting” revealed 2460 hits, the term “microbe hunter” a mere 21300 hits. The combination of these words with “amateur microscopy” returned a total of… 1 and 4 hits respectively. This is not much. The one returned hit is particularly interesting. It is from Popular Science, September 1934, entitled “Microbe hunting with your Microscope”. It gives a nice description on how to prepare bacteria for microscopic observation.

  Microbe hunting – a new term to an old pastime and hobby? The terms seems to be around now for over 70 years, but is still not used widely. Maybe it is time to establish this term a bit more. I have to admit that “Amateur Microscopy?” does sound a bit more “professional” (is this a paradox?), but the sentence “I’m a microbe hunter” flows much easier than “I’m an amateur microscopist”, so maybe this is enough justification to establish that term, even if amateur microscopists observe specimens other than microorganisms as well.

  In any case, I herewith propose that the term “Microbe Hunting” be used interchangeably for amateur microscopy. Comments?

  ]]> http://www.microbehunter.com/2010/01/04/what-in-the-world-is-microbe-hunting/feed/ 1