[bionet.general] optical density

ebstokes@maxwell.crd.ge.com (03/31/91)

I am interested in finding out if there exist alternative definitions
of "optical density" in different disciplines. That is, does a
physicist mean the same thing as a biologist when she says "optical
density". I'll start by stating what I mean when I say "optical
density". If a beam of light has an initial intensity I0 (in watts,
for example, or watts/(unit area)), and then the beam passes through a
medium of optical density 'od', then the intensity of the beam of
light after passing through the medium is:

	I = I0 * 10^(-od)			(1)

Taking the base ten logarithm of equation (1) then yields an
expression for 'od' in terms of I/I0:

	od = -log(I/I0)				(2)

I am, for the record, a physicist.

Ed Stokes
ebstokes@crd.ge.com

BROE@AARDVARK.UCS.UOKNOR.EDU (Bruce Roe) (03/31/91)

Ed Stokes wrote: 
=> Message-Id: <9103302101.AA11433@genbank.bio.net>
=> Followup-To: sci.optics
=>
=> I am interested in finding out if there exist alternative definitions
=> of "optical density" in different disciplines. That is, does a
=> physicist mean the same thing as a biologist when she says "optical
=> density". I'll start by stating what I mean when I say "optical
=> density". If a beam of light has an initial intensity I0 (in watts,
=> for example, or watts/(unit area)), and then the beam passes through a
=> medium of optical density 'od', then the intensity of the beam of
=> light after passing through the medium is:
=>
=>      I = I0 * 10^(-od)                       (1)
=>
=> Taking the base ten logarithm of equation (1) then yields an
=> expression for 'od' in terms of I/I0:
=>
=>      od = -log(I/I0)                         (2)
=>
=> I am, for the record, a physicist.
=>

 Ed,
	Biochemists use "optical density" to mean exactly what you have
 given above.  To elaborate by quoting from "Lehninger's Biochemistry"
 
        "The fraction of the incident light absorbed by a solution at a
   given wavelength is related to the thickness of the absorbing layer and
   to the concentration of the absorbing species.  These two relationships
   are combined into the Lambert-Beer law, given in integrated form as:

		log(I0/I) = acl			(1)

   where:	I0 is the intensity of the incident light,
	I is the intensity of the transmitted light,
	a is the molar absorbancy index (also given as epslon or molar
		extinction coefficient),
	c is the concentration of the absorbing species (moles/liter),
	l is the thickness of the light-absorbing sample (generally
		arbitrarily set at 1.0 cm).

	The Lambert-Beer law assumes that the incident light is parallel and
   monochromatic and that the solvent and solute molecules are randomly
   oriented.  The expression:

		log(I0/I) = O.D. = Absorbance	(2)

   is called the absorbancy (A) or optical density (O.D.);
   where absorbancy is prefered."

	Most nucleic acid oriented biochemists and molecular biologists
 also accept the following:

	An absorbance unit (or O.D. unit) is directly proportional
 to the concentration of the absorbing solute, when the absorbing 
 layer is a fixed thickness.  We also have a tendency to talk about
 a test tube (epp. tube now a days) containing say 2 OD's of RNA.
 That means if we were to dissolve the RNA in 1 ml and measure the
 absorbance in a 1 cm path length cuvette, we would obtain a A260
 reading of 2.000 .  In years past we had to define this in our
 publications, but now this is generally accepted.

 Cheers,

    Bruce A. Roe
        Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry
        INTERNET: BROE@aardvark.ucs.uoknor.edu
        BITNET:   BROE@uokucsvx
        AT&TNET:  405-325-4912 or 405-325-7610
        SnailNet: Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry
                  University of Oklahoma
                  620 Parrington Oval, Rm 208
                  Norman, Oklahoma 73019
        FAXnet:   405-325-6111
        ICBMnet:  35 deg 14 min North, 97 deg 27 min West

dbk@aberystwyth.ac.uk (04/02/91)

OD and Absorbance are *NOT* the same. Absorbance refers to the absorption
of light *BY A CHROMOPHORE*. OD refers to the amount of light that sets
out from the source but doesn't reach the detecctor. In biology, the usual
reason is that it is *SCATTERED* (mainly elastically), not that it is
absorbed. Hence the difference in terminology. As Michael Caine might say,
"not many people know this".