4.8 Article

Microfluidic Self-Sorting of Mammalian Cells to Achieve Cell Cycle Synchrony by Hydrophoresis

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 81, 期 5, 页码 1964-1968

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac8024575

关键词

-

资金

  1. Korea Science and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF) [R0A-2008-000-20109-0]
  2. Nano/Bio Science and Technology Program [2005-01291]
  3. MEST, Korea
  4. Ministry of Education, Science & Technology (MoST), Republic of Korea [KIB 1] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)
  5. National Research Foundation of Korea [2005-2001291, 2008-0060165, 핵06A3602] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cell cycle studies for examining regulatory mechanisms and progression invariably require synchronization of cell cultures at a specific phase of the cell cycle. Current implementations to produce synchronous cell populations, however, tend to perturb normal cellular progression and metabolism and typically require complex, time-consuming preparations. Thus, it is challenging for the development of a simple, noninvasive, and effective means for cell cycle synchronization. We demonstrate the use of hydrophoretic size separation to sort cells in tar-get phases of the cell cycle entirely based on a hydrodynamic principle. With this method, we found that there is a linear relationship between a cell's size and its position distribution in the hydrophoretic device. We also demonstrate the robustness of the hydrophoretic method for practical applications by sorting cells in the G(0)/G(1) and G(2)/M phases out of the original, asynchronous cells with a high level of synchrony of 95.5% and 85.2%, respectively. These results show that the hydrophoretic size separation can be used in order to collect cells at the same phase of the cell cycle in a gentle, noninvasive way.

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