4.7 Article

384-Channel parallel microfluidic cytometer for rare-cell screening

期刊

LAB ON A CHIP
卷 9, 期 2, 页码 305-310

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/b811889b

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [HG-01389, AR-47062, DK-02889, DK-65032]
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ARTHRITIS AND MUSCULOSKELETAL AND SKIN DISEASES [R01AR047062] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [R03DK065032, K08DK002889] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have constructed a 384-channel parallel microfluidic cytometer (PMC). The multichannel architecture allows 384 unique samples for a cell-based screen to be read out in approximately 6-10 min, about 30-times the speed of a conventional fluorescence-activated cytometer system (FACS). This architecture also allows the signal integration time to be varied over a larger range than is practical in single-channel FACS and is suitable for detection of rare-cells in a high background of negatives. The signal-to-noise advantages have been confirmed by using the system to count rare clonal osteocytes in the most difficult early stages of an expression-cloning screen for the carboxy- terminal parathyroid hormone receptor (CPTHR). This problem requires finding several dozen positive cells in a background of one million negatives. The system is automated around a scanning laser confocal detector and a 96-tip robotic pipettor and can maintain in vitro cultures on-system in 384-well plates. It is therefore directly practical for biology applications using existing high-throughput culture facilities. The PMC system lends itself to high-sample-number cytometry with an unusual capability for time synchronization and rare-cell sensitivity. A limited ability to handle large sample numbers has restricted applications of single-channel FACS in combinatorial cell assays; therefore the PMC could have a significant application in high-throughput screening.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据