Corrigendum to Coherent and Incoherent Imaging of Biological Specimens with Electrons and X-rays [Ultramicroscopy 231 (2021) 113301] (Ultramicroscopy (2021) 231, (S0304399121000887), (10.1016/j.ultramic.2021.113301))

The author regrets the error in the last 2 lines of Table 3 and the erroneous conclusions on the benefits of higher energy Compton Scattering. The last 2 lines in Table 3 relating to 20 keV and 40 keV X-rays are are incorrect. Table 3 should be [Table presented] These incorrect values led to erroneous conclusions on the benefits of higher energy Compton scattering in the last paragraph of Section 4.1. “For Compton scattering it is not meaningful to use contrast factors similar to those defined by equations 25-27 as the low dose means that an impractically high fluence, 4.89 × 10¹⁰ X-rays/nm² (See Table 3), would be needed to give an equivalent dose of 3 × 10⁷ Gy. The pixel size would then be 0.4-0.5 nm, approaching atomic dimensions! In practice the limitation becomes the maximum fluence from the light source. The minimum pixel size is 20 nm similar to the other X-ray imaging methods, if one assumes that 10 counts are a minimum acceptable signal and the fluence is 10⁴ X-rays/ Ų. However this could be considerably reduced for brighter sources.” no longer applies. A simple analysis from equations 24 and 26 shows that coherent elastic scattering is in practice always superior to Compton scattering in terms of dose limited spatial resolution. [Formula presented] The author would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.