18
$\begingroup$

My daughter is 5 and wants to learn about Biology. I thought a great start is to see life from pond water through a USB microscope. It would be great if she could see organisms like amoebas, flagellates and ciliates with her own eyes. The microscopes I have seen typically have a zoom range of about 40 to 400x.

Would this range be sufficient to see microscopic pond life?

$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ +1 for awesome parenting and an intellectually curious child, as well as the good question. $\endgroup$ – David Richerby Apr 22 '15 at 9:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It's advised not to start using a regular (meaning here transmitted light) microscope with kids under the age of about 10-12. It has to do with their brain being insuffiently developed to relate the two dimensional microscopical image with the three dimensional reality... I wouldn't know. I'm not a psychologist nor a neurologist, but however I am a dad of a 10 years old girl and an avid amateur microscopist with some 45 years of experience in that field. When my kid turned 8, I gave her one of my microscopes: a nice Zeiss Standard. The first time we did some pond dipping together, we found som $\endgroup$ – guest Apr 17 '17 at 10:18
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @mydaftquestion Mum teaches biology. she often had a pond slurry aquarium, which is very interesting for children. they often harbor Cyclops, Daphne, Planaria, Cyclops, Snails and various types of algea. You can use a vase. For microscopes you can mix up some sticks and hay in a mug for 2 days. 10-100x is the best range. $\endgroup$ – aliential Nov 20 at 7:42
13
$\begingroup$

2019-05-01 Edited: Updated dead links

From the comment section:

I would go with a cheap one with a magnification of ~40X. According to this source, 10-20X is already sufficient to see large protozoans and algae in a pond. Here some suggestions on what you could look at.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Both links are dead now. $\endgroup$ – Piotr Chojnacki Apr 27 '19 at 5:44
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @PiotrChojnacki Thanks for letting me know! The first link should be back soon (website is under maintenance). The second link is now restored (broke due to a change in the address name). $\endgroup$ – cagliari2005 May 2 '19 at 6:16
1
$\begingroup$

To me, microscopes are like pacemakers for your heart, they only come in two main categories, junk and not junk. The good news is pacemakers are way less complicated.

In short, 400x (on a $100 or so compound microscope) SHOULD certainly get you all the quality high school level bio class stuff a pond has to offer, without a lot technical skill to try to see it. BUT it is about CLARITY not just zoom. For pond watching, you want a compound (or phase) microscope with four main ingredients - a light condenser, a 10x objective piece, a 40x objective piece, and a 10x eyepiece. ?Why:

Most of the time, unless you are going to spend considerably more money on something that claims really high magnification (ie 1000x - 3000x etc) you wont get clarity and detail, which is everything.

to get best results for a beginner - First you have to look at what is called the "objective piece" (which is the nozzle looking piece that actually looks down into the specimen - it is a lens mechanism) your microscope MUST INCLUDE one objective piece with a 10x AND an object piece at 40x (but NOT so much a 100x - 100x is not needed and requires more work, 60x is good, but NOT 100x unless you are already expert level). These objective pieces should also have a minimum - lets say 'quality' - rating of "achromatic 160" or otherwise an "infinity" rating on what is called the "DIN rating" on that "objective piece." Decent quality microscopes usually have this rating printed right on the objective piece and objective pieces are removable and swappable. Usually, your good basic microscope has 3 objective pieces with different magnifications ranging 4x - 100x. The eyepiece (where you actually look into) should have at least a 10x magnification. The two of these together (40x X 10x), will give you an enlargement of 400x which is the benchmark for "good or quality." This shopping list also gives you the best value for your money. In fact, you can spend 100 bucks or less for these essentials, while others will cost you 100 bucks or more and DO NOT offer these essentials even though they come in brighter, prettier colors. You can also spend $300 and get a microscope with these min standards that will last her until college (and is upgradeable). SECOND - assuming she is not doing anything like virus research yet - the compound or phase microscope should have a light condenser (which would be a red flag if it did not).

The only other thing I think is important is to make sure it is a plug in - not just battery operated. That tends to go hand in hand with better quality, but doesn't necessarily mean more expensive.

The things that I mentioned are all the minimums that are inherent in microscopes that give a quality CLEAR image from most, if not all, of what you want to look at from a pond (but you can go much deeper). This can be had for $100 in the year 2020 or 2021. However, these very same microscopes that have these standards will typically include many more useful features (same price - all included).

| improve this answer | |
New contributor
vexint co is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.