4.7 Article

A high-throughput acoustic cell sorter

Journal

LAB ON A CHIP
Volume 15, Issue 19, Pages 3870-3879

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c5lc00706b

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [1 R01 GM112048-01A1, 1R33EB019785-01]
  2. National Science Foundation [IIP-1534645, IDBR-1455658]
  3. Penn State Center for Nanoscale Science (MRSEC) [DMR-1420620]
  4. NHLBI Division of Intramural Research
  5. NSF
  6. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [ZICHL005905, ZIAHL006197] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  7. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL IMAGING AND BIOENGINEERING [R33EB019785] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  8. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [R01GM112048] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Acoustic-based fluorescence activated cell sorters (FACS) have drawn increased attention in recent years due to their versatility, high biocompatibility, high controllability, and simple design. However, the sorting throughput for existing acoustic cell sorters is far from optimum for practical applications. Here we report a high-throughput cell sorting method based on standing surface acoustic waves (SSAWs). We utilized a pair of focused interdigital transducers (FIDTs) to generate SSAW with high resolution and high energy efficiency. As a result, the sorting throughput is improved significantly from conventional acoustic-based cell sorting methods. We demonstrated the successful sorting of 10 mu m polystyrene particles with a minimum actuation time of 72 mu s, which translates to a potential sorting rate of more than 13800 events per second. Without using a cell-detection unit, we were able to demonstrate an actual sorting throughput of 3300 events per second. Our sorting method can be conveniently integrated with upstream detection units, and it represents an important development towards a functional acoustic-based FACS system.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available