4.8 Article

Microfluidic Multifunctional Probe Array Dielectrophoretic Force Spectroscopy with Wide Loading Rates

期刊

ACS NANO
卷 6, 期 10, 页码 8665-8673

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/nn302202t

关键词

dielectrophoresis; force spectroscopy; intermolecular interactions; microfluidic device; quasi-equilibrium unbinding events; high-force pulling assay

资金

  1. Korean Ministry of Education and Science [NRF-2010-0026223, NRF-2010-0027238, NRF-2010-0013619, NRF-2009-0068841]
  2. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The simultaneous investigation of a large number of events with different types of intermolecular interactions, from nonequilibrium high-force pulling assays to quasi-equilibrium unbinding events in the same environment, can be very important for fully understanding intermolecular bond-rupture mechanisms. Here, we describe a novel dielectrophoretic force spectroscopy technique that utilizes microsized beads as multifunctional probes for parallel measurement of intermolecular forces with an extremely wide range of force rate (10(-4) to 10(4) pN/s) inside a microfluidic device. In our experiments, various forces, which broadly form the basis of all molecular interactions, were measured across a range of force loading rates by multifunctional probes of various diameters with a throughput of over 600 events per mm(2), simultaneously and in the same environment. Furthermore, the individual bond-rupture forces, the parameters for the characterization of entire energy landscapes, and the effective stiffness of the force spectroscopy were determined on the basis of the measured result;. This method of determining intermolecular forces could be very useful for the precise and simultaneous examination of various molecular interactions, as it can be easily and cost-effectively implemented within a microfluidic device for a range of applications including immunoassays, molecular mechanics, chemical and biological screening, and mechanobiology.

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

4.8
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