4.8 Article

Cell-based microfluidic platform for mimicking human olfactory system

期刊

BIOSENSORS & BIOELECTRONICS
卷 74, 期 -, 页码 554-561

出版社

ELSEVIER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2015.06.072

关键词

Olfactory receptor; Gaseous odorant; Microfluidics platform; Cell-based odorant detection system

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning [2014039771, 2014053108]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Various attempts have been made to mimic the human olfactory system using human olfactory receptors (hORs). In particular, OR-expressed cell-based odorant detection systems mimic the smell sensing mechanism of humans, as they exploit endogenous cellular signaling pathways. However, the majority of such cell-based studies have been performed in the liquid phase to maintain cell viability, and liquid odorants were used as detection targets. Here, we present a microfluidic device for the detection of gaseous odorants which more closely mimics the human olfactory system. Cells expressing hOR were cultured on a porous membrane. The membrane was then flipped over and placed between two compartments. The upper compartment is the gaseous part where gaseous odorants are supplied, while the lower compartment is the aqueous part where viable cells are maintained in the liquid medium. Using this simple microfluidic device, we were able to detect gaseous odorant molecules by a fluorescence signal. The fluorescence signal was generated by calcium influx resulting from the interaction between odorant molecules and the hOR. The system allowed detection of gaseous odorant molecules in real-time, and the findings showed that the fluorescence responses increased dose-dependently in the range of 0-2 ppm odorant. In addition, the system can discriminate among gaseous odorant molecules. This microfluidic system closely mimics the human olfactory system in the sense that the submerged cells detect gaseous odorants. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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