| Title |
A microscale anisotropic biaxial cell stretching device for applications in mechanobiology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biotechnology Techniques, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10529-013-1381-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dominique Tremblay, Sophie Chagnon-Lessard, Maryam Mirzaei, Andrew E. Pelling, Michel Godin |
| Abstract |
A multi-layered polydimethylsiloxane microfluidic device with an integrated suspended membrane has been fabricated that allows dynamic and multi-axial mechanical deformation and simultaneous live-cell microscopy imaging. The transparent membrane's strain field can be controlled independently along two orthogonal directions. Human foreskin fibroblasts were immobilized on the membrane's surface and stretched along two orthogonal directions sequentially while performing live-cell imaging. Cyclic deformation of the cells induced a reversible reorientation perpendicular to the direction of the applied strain. Cells remained viable in the microdevice for several days. As opposed to existing microfluidic or macroscale stretching devices, this device can impose changing, anisotropic and time-varying strain fields in order to more closely mimic the complexities of strains occurring in vivo. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 109 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 31% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 9% |
| Researcher | 10 | 9% |
| Other | 13 | 12% |
| Unknown | 19 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 39 | 35% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 19% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 9 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Unknown | 22 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 October 2013.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Biotechnology Techniques
#2,205
of 2,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,180
of 223,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biotechnology Techniques
#19
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,762 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 223,617 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.