| Title |
Microplate cell-retaining methodology for high-content analysis of individual non-adherent unanchored cells in a population
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biomedical Microdevices, June 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10544-006-9143-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Assaf Deutsch, Naomi Zurgil, Ihar Hurevich, Yana Shafran, Elena Afrimzon, Pnina Lebovich, Mordechai Deutsch |
| Abstract |
A high throughput Microtiter plate Cell Retainer (MCR) has been developed to enable, for the first time, high-content, time-dependent analysis of the same single non-adherent and non-anchored cells in a large cell population, while bio-manipulating the cells. The identity of each cell in the investigated population is secured, even during bio-manipulation, by cell retention in a specially designed concave microlens, acting as a picoliter well (PW). The MCR technique combines micro-optical features and microtiter plate methodology. The array of PWs serves as the bottom of a microtiter plate, fitted with a unique flow damper element. The latter enables rapid fluid exchange without dislodging the cells from their original PWs, thus maintaining the cells' identity. Loading cell suspensions and reagents into the MCR is performed by simple pouring, followed by gravitational sedimentation and settling of cells into the PWs. Cell viability and cell division within the MCR were shown to be similar to those obtained under similar conditions in a standard microtiter plate. The efficiency of single cell occupancy in the MCR exceeded 90%. No cell dislodging was observed when comparing images before and after bio-manipulations (rinsing, staining, etc.). The MCR permits the performance of kinetic measurements on an individual cell basis. Data acquisition is governed by software, controlling microscope performance, stage position and image acquisition and analysis. The PW's unique micro-optical features enable rapid, simultaneous signal analysis of each individual cell, bypassing lengthy image analysis. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Israel | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Slovenia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 60 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 21% |
| Researcher | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 8% |
| Professor | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 30 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 17% |
| Engineering | 5 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 31 | 49% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 April 2023.
All research outputs
#7,478,342
of 23,510,717 outputs
Outputs from Biomedical Microdevices
#230
of 763 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,512
of 65,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomedical Microdevices
#10
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,510,717 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 763 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 65,057 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.