Wavefront correction conjugated to a single dominant thin scattering layer (the mouse skull) enabled the first submicron-resolution in vivo imaging of dendrites and microglia through the intact skull (Park, Sun and Cui, PNAS 2015), but the corrected field of view (FOV) collapses when aberration sources are distributed throughout a thick tissue volume rather than confined to one layer. The authors envisioned that multiconjugate adaptive optics (AO) — several deformable mirrors conjugated to different depths, as in astronomy — could more effectively compensate thick tissue and achieve a greater corrected FOV, at the cost of system complexity. A decade of follow-up work has modelled multiconjugate correction, demonstrated it only for aberration correction in weakly scattering samples, and encircled the problem with single-conjugate, multi-patch, and computational alternatives. The practical realization remains open: a microscopy system using multiple depth-conjugated correctors with an effective measurement and control strategy, achieving substantially enlarged corrected FOV for submicron in vivo imaging inside volumetrically scattering tissue, together with the coupled wavefront-measurement speed needed to make remeasurement practical in vivo.

Background

Multiphoton (e.g., two-photon excited fluorescence) microscopy focuses near-infrared laser light inside tissue and builds images by scanning the focal spot; because fluorescence is generated only in a sub-femtoliter focal volume, scattered emission light can still be collected, which makes it the standard tool for deep in vivo imaging of the mammalian brain. Its resolution at depth is nonetheless destroyed by tissue inhomogeneity: smooth refractive-index variations cause aberration (deformation of the wavefront that lowers the Strehl ratio, the peak intensity of the focus relative to an ideal aberration-free focus), while small-scale structure causes multiple scattering that scrambles the focus entirely. Adaptive optics (AO), imported from astronomy, compensates aberrations with a deformable mirror (DM) or spatial light modulator (SLM) whose surface shape imprints the conjugate (opposite) of the measured wavefront distortion.

Where the corrector is placed matters. A DM in the pupil plane corrects perfectly only at one point; the correction stays valid over the surrounding isoplanatic patch, a region set by short-range wavefront correlations in tissue (the optical memory effect) whose size shrinks as more modes are corrected. If one dominant thin aberrating layer exists, placing the DM optically conjugated to that layer makes one correction valid over a much larger field of view (FOV). Park, Sun and Cui (2015) used this principle with IMPACT (iterative multiphoton adaptive-compensation technique, a frequency-multiplexed, fluorescence-feedback wavefront measurement on a micro-electro-mechanical-system (MEMS) deformable mirror) to image neural dendrites and microglia through the ~150-µm intact mouse skull with submicron resolution, gaining a 15-fold corrected-FOV area (Gaussian full width at half maximum, FWHM, 4.5 µm to 17.6 µm) over pupil-plane correction. Their numerical study (Fig. S4) showed the conjugation advantage shrinking — though not vanishing (about threefold in area) — as the aberrating volume thickened to fill the space above the focus.

Astronomy solved the analogous problem of turbulence distributed over altitude with multiconjugate AO (MCAO): several DMs, each conjugated to a different turbulent layer, jointly tomographing and correcting the three-dimensional distortion. The paper's stated forward vision is that additional conjugation of a few DMs 'could more effectively compensate thick tissue to achieve a greater corrected FOV, albeit at the cost of system complexity.' The coupled practical constraints are measurement speed (IMPACT took about 4.4 s for 952 controlled pixels, reducible to about 1.5 s by measuring only contributing pixels, and multiplying correctors multiplies the measurement burden) and the absence of quantitative design rules mapping tissue parameters (thickness, heterogeneity scale, wavelength) and hardware resources (actuator count) to achievable corrected FOV, Strehl recovery, and resolution.

Problem Statement

Realize, in a practical microscope, wavefront correction that remains valid over a substantially larger corrected field of view inside thick, volumetrically (multi-layer or uniformly) scattering biological tissue in vivo — extending the turbid-layer-conjugated correction of Park et al. (2015) beyond the single-dominant-thin-layer regime. Concretely: design and demonstrate a multiconjugate adaptive-optics configuration (multiple wavefront correctors optically conjugated to different depths in the scattering volume, as envisioned by Park et al. (2015)), together with a wavefront measurement and control strategy that manages the coupled devices within in vivo measurement times. The overarching scientific objective is one: make submicron-resolution multiphoton imaging valid over large fields deep inside thick scattering tissue (such as the intact-skull or deep mouse brain), where single-conjugate correction loses its advantage; the architecture and the control strategy are jointly necessary parts of that objective, not independent deliverables.

References

  1. Park J-H, Sun W, Cui M (2015). High-resolution in vivo imaging of mouse brain through the intact skull. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112(30):9236–9241. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1505939112. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1505939112
  2. Simmonds RD, Booth MJ (2013). Modelling of multi-conjugate adaptive optics for spatially variant aberrations in microscopy. Journal of Optics 15(9):094010. DOI: 10.1088/2040-8978/15/9/094010. https://doi.org/10.1088/2040-8978/15/9/094010
  3. Wu T, Cui M (2015). Numerical study of multi-conjugate large area wavefront correction for deep tissue microscopy. Optics Express 23(6):7463. DOI: 10.1364/OE.23.007463. https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.23.007463
  4. Kong L, Cui M (2016). In Vivo Deep Tissue Imaging via Iterative Multiphoton Adaptive Compensation Technique. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics 22(4):40–49. DOI: 10.1109/JSTQE.2015.2509947. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTQE.2015.2509947
  5. Park J-H, Kong L, Zhou Y, Cui M (2017). Large-field-of-view imaging by multi-pupil adaptive optics. Nature Methods 14(6):581–583. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.4290. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4290
  6. Tao X, Lam T, Zhu B, Li Q, Reinig MR, Kubby J (2017). Three-dimensional focusing through scattering media using conjugate adaptive optics with remote focusing (CAORF). Optics Express 25(9):10368. DOI: 10.1364/OE.25.010368. https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.25.010368
  7. Wang T, Ouzounov DG, Wu C, Horton NG, Zhang B, Wu C-H, Zhang Y, Schnitzer MJ, Xu C (2018). Three-photon imaging of mouse brain structure and function through the intact skull. Nature Methods 15(10):789–792. DOI: 10.1038/s41592-018-0115-y. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-018-0115-y
  8. Zhao Q, Shi X, Zhu X, Zheng Y, Wu C, Tang H, Hu L, Xue Y, Gong W, Si K (2019). Large field of view correction by using conjugate adaptive optics with multiple guide stars. Journal of Biophotonics 12(2):e201800225. DOI: 10.1002/jbio.201800225. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbio.201800225
  9. Yoon S, Lee H, Hong JH, Lim Y-S, Choi W (2020). Laser scanning reflection-matrix microscopy for aberration-free imaging through intact mouse skull. Nature Communications 11:5721. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-19550-x. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19550-x
  10. Papadopoulos IN, Jouhanneau J-S, Takahashi N, Kaplan D, Larkum M, Poulet J, Judkewitz B (2020). Dynamic conjugate F-SHARP microscopy. Light: Science & Applications 9:110. DOI: 10.1038/s41377-020-00348-x. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41377-020-00348-x
  11. Streich L, Boffi JC, Wang L, Alhalaseh K, Barbieri M, Rehm R, Deivasigamani S, Gross CT, Agarwal A, Prevedel R (2021). High-resolution structural and functional deep brain imaging using adaptive optics three-photon microscopy. Nature Methods 18(10):1253–1258. DOI: 10.1038/s41592-021-01257-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-021-01257-6
  12. Qin Z, She Z, Chen C, Wu W, Lau JKY, Ip NY, Qu JY (2022). Deep tissue multi-photon imaging using adaptive optics with direct focus sensing and shaping. Nature Biotechnology 40(11):1663–1671. DOI: 10.1038/s41587-022-01343-w. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-022-01343-w
  13. Jo Y, Lee Y-R, Hong JH, Kim D-Y, Kwon J, Choi M, Kim M, Choi W (2022). Through-skull brain imaging in vivo at visible wavelengths via dimensionality reduction adaptive-optical microscopy. Science Advances 8(30):eabo4366. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abo4366. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abo4366
  14. Zhang Q, Hu Q, Berlage C, Kner P, Judkewitz B, Booth M, Ji N (2023). Adaptive optics for optical microscopy [Invited]. Biomedical Optics Express 14(4):1732. DOI: 10.1364/BOE.479886. https://doi.org/10.1364/BOE.479886
  15. Blochet B, Akemann W, Gigan S, Bourdieu L (2023). Fast wavefront shaping for two-photon brain imaging with multipatch correction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120(51):e2305593120. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2305593120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2305593120
  16. Furieri T, Bassi A, Bonora S (2023). Large field of view aberrations correction with deformable lenses and multi conjugate adaptive optics. Journal of Biophotonics 16(12):e202300104. DOI: 10.1002/jbio.202300104. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbio.202300104
  17. Kang I, Kim H, Natan R, Zhang Q, Yu SX, Ji N (2026). Adaptive optical correction for in vivo two-photon fluorescence microscopy with neural fields. Nature Methods 23(5):1037–1046. DOI: 10.1038/s41592-026-03053-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-026-03053-6
  18. Cheng X, Wang B, Luo L, Sun Z, He S (2026). Physics-informed multi-encoder adaptive optics enables rapid aberration correction for intravital microscopy of deep complex tissue. Nature Communications 17:6651. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-026-73389-2. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-73389-2