Mite as Well Make a Post

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:39 pm

Water Mite
Zeiss Axiostar Plus w/Sony DSC-P200

First time I have had the Axiostar up and running in some time.

Cyclops · Post by **Cyclops** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:42 pm

Oh wow Ken, great images !
I dont think Ive ever come across water mites before. I have viewed (and drawn) dust mites in the past tho, they look very similar.

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:46 pm

Thanks Cyclops, yeah mites are pretty much mites, though there are some differences if one looks closely. These were in an old aquarium that I had dismantled and failed to empty. Though there might be something good in that putrid water but all it turned up was this mite and one other, third image.

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:20 pm

Very clear images. Care to comment on what any of the structures are? Those two "side pockets" in the third picture look air-filled.

--Rik

Bill D · Post by **Bill D** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:26 pm

Ken, these are beautiful!

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:33 pm

Rik replied:

Care to comment on what any of the structures are? Those two "side pockets" in the third picture look air-filled.

I don't much about mites, maybe I should have researched them a little before posting so as to give a description that would bring out the characteristics of the anatomy. I would assume that, the structure of round chambers, right of center in the second image, are air sacs and the same goes for the pale lime green ones in the third, also in the second I would also assume that the opening shown (posterior) in the upper left corner would be that of the anus. The third image is that of a different mite that was near the one presented in the first and second images, I focused mainly on the surface to show the texture or make up, of the mites exoskeleton.

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:36 pm

Looks as though we posted at the same time Bill, thanks. I have another of a similar mite taken using the darkfield technique. You can see it here

Walter Piorkowski · Post by **Walter Piorkowski** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:13 pm

Very nice images Ken. Could you see eyes on your specimen?

Walt

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 3:43 am

I am not sure if these are photo-receptors or eyes but looking at the head in the first image, you will notice that it is cone shaped, at the base of the cone, one on each side, there are two oval shaped spots. I am assuming that these are photo-receptors of some sort. Thanks Walt

Bill D · Post by **Bill D** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 5:04 am

The dark field image of the mite is just stunning!

Cyclops · Post by **Cyclops** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 5:13 am

Bill D wrote:The dark field image of the mite is just stunning!

I second that!

Bruce Williams · Post by **Bruce Williams** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:15 am

Intriguing series of photographs Ken - interesting body shape for a mite too. I particularly like pic2 - pin sharp and lots of interesting anatomical detail. I like pic3 as well ...er and pic1

Excellent photos!

Bruce

puzzledpaul · Post by **puzzledpaul** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:53 pm

Interesting (and clear) images, Ken - well done

My favourite is def. #2 ... with a bit of imagination it could just about be anything - esp. if cropped to remove bg.

I can think of quite a few ppl who'd give their right arm for a 'texture' like this

(what was the mag / field width on this pic, btw?)

pp

beetleman · Post by **beetleman** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:44 am

Super photos Ken...We want lots more!!!!

Ken Ramos · Post by **Ken Ramos** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:37 pm

Thanks for all of your comments guys, they are greatly appreciated.

In response to puzzledpauls question, I am not very good with numbers or math, that's why I exclude scale bars, though I have read Charlies post several times on them

. The first image is at 100X, a Zeiss 10X CP Achromat NA 0.25, the last two at 400X, a Zeiss 40X CP Achromat also, NA 0.65. These mites are just barely visible to the naked eye and really you would not notice them unless they moved. Thinking back, I should have placed these under darkfield also but it never occured to me at the time. I have been away doing macro so much that I rarely get around to my scopes as much anymore but with winter almost here, I am thinking that will all change...for a while anyway.