Fourier analysis to measure diffusion coefficients and resolve mixtures on a continuous electrophoresis chip

Analytical Chemistry

Volumn 79, Issue 21, 2007, Pages 8222-8231

  Estevez Torres A ^a   Gosse, C ^b   Le Saux, T ^a   Allemand, J F ^a   Croquette, V ^a   Berthoumieux, H ^a   Lemarchand, A ^c   Jullien, L ^a  

^a ECOLE NORMALE SUPÉRIEURE   (France)

^b CNRS   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ PIERRE ET MARIE CURIE   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DIFFUSION IN SOLIDS; ELECTRIC FIELD EFFECTS; ELECTROPHORESIS; FOURIER TRANSFORMS; MOLECULAR MASS; TWO DIMENSIONAL;

ELECTROPHORESIS CHIP; RESOLVE MIXTURES;

FOURIER ANALYSIS;

FLUORESCEIN;

ARTICLE; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; ELECTRIC FIELD; ELECTROPHORESIS; FOURIER ANALYSIS; FOURIER TRANSFORMATION; MOLECULAR WEIGHT; SIMULATION; VELOCITY;

EID: 35848961243     PISSN: 00032700     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ac070532z     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Cantor, C. R.; Schimmel, P. R. Biophysical Chemistry, Part II; Freeman: New York, 1980.
2. Chen, A.; Shapiro, M. J. Anal. Chem. 1999, 71, 669A-675A
3. Auer, M.; Moore, K. J.; Meyer-Ames, F. J.; Guenther, R.; Pope, A.J.; Stoeckli, K. A. Drug Discovery Today 1998, 3, 457-465.
4. Kaufman, E. N.; Jain, R. K. J. Immunol. Methods 1992, 155, 1-17.
5. Hatch, A.; Kamholz, A. E.; Hawkins, K. R.; Munson, M. S.; Schilling, E. A.; Weigl, B. H.; Yager, P. Nat. Biotechnol. 2001, 19, 461-465.
6. Taylor, G. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 1953, 219, 186-203.
7. Culbertson, C.T.; Jacobson, S.C.; Ramsey, J.M. Talanta 2002, 56, 365-373.
8. Stilbs, P. Anal. Chem. 1981, 53, 2135-2137.
9. Elson E. L. Annu. Rev. Php. Chem. 1985, 36, 379-406.
10. Sprague, B. L.; McNally, J. G. Trends Cell. Biol 2005, 15, 84-91.
11. Schurr, J. M. CRC Crit. Rev. Biochem. 1977, 4, 371-431.
12. Zhang, K. J.; Briggs, M. E.; Gammon, R. W.; Sengers; J. V. J. Chem. Php. 1996, 104, 6881-6892.
13. Kamholz, A E.; Weigl, B. H.; Finlayson, B. A.; Yager, P. Anal. Chem. 1999, 71, 5340-5347.
14. Dertinger, S. K. W.; Chiu, D. T.; Jeon, N. L.; Whitesides, G. M. Anal. Chem. 2001, 73, 1240-1246.
15. Cabrera, C. R.; Finlayson, B.; Yager, P. Anal. Chem. 2001, 73, 658-666.
16. Kamholz, A E.; Schilling, E. A.; Yager, P. Biophys. J. 2001, 80, 1967-1972.
17. Salmon, J.-B.; Dubrocq, C.; Tabeling, P.; Charier, S.; Acor, D.; Jullien, L.; Ferrage, F. Anal. Chem. 2005, 77, 3417-3424.
18. Ismagilov, R. F.; Stroock, A. D.; Kenis, P. J. A.; Whitesides, G. Appl. Php. Lett. 2000, 76, 2376-2378.
19. Beard, D. A. J. Appl. Php. 2001, 89, 4667-4669.
20. Kamholz, A. E.; Yager, P. Biophys. J. 2001, 80, 155-160.
21. Salmon, J.-B.; Ajdari, A. J. Appl. Php. 2007, 101, 074902.
22. Tsay, T.-T.; Jacobson, K. A. Biophys. J. 1991, 60, 360-368.
23. Berk, D. A.; Yuan, F.; Leunig, M.; Jain, R. K. Biophp. J. 1993, 65, 2428-2436.
24. The velocity field of the species F can be essentially considered as constant along 2 in the whole device (vide infra). As the F concentration at the injection point is also independent on z, the problem is rigorously bidimensional.
25. 2t).
26. For an example of synthesis protocol, see: Cadix, A; Chassenieux, C.; Lafuma, F.; Lequeux, F. Macromolecules 2005, 38, 527-536.
27. Carlsson, C.; Jonsson, M.; Akerman, B. Nucleic Acids Res. 1995, 23, 2413-2420.
28. Duffy, D. C.; McDonald, J. C.; Schueller, O. J. A.; Whitesides, G. M. Anal. Chem. 1998, 70, 4974-4984.
29. Ng Lee, J.; Park, C.; Whitesides, G. M. Anal. Chem. 2003, 75, 6544-6554.
30. Ito, T.; Inoue, A.; Sato, K.; Hosokawa, K.; Maeda, M. Anal. Chem. 2005, 77, 4759-4764.
31. The front position was calculated by correlating each intensity profile with its symetric. See, for example: Gosse, C.; Croquette, V. Biophys. J. 2002, 82, 3314-3329.
32. j,n extraction.
33. The whole pool of normalized Fourier modes was appropriate for mixture analysis. All the normalized Fourier modes are fitted in parallel with a monoexponential and a biexponential function. All the modes giving satisfactory residuals with the simpler fit were discarded, the parameters extracted from their biexponential analysis being considered unreliable (Figure S-9).
34. The Gaussian shape reflects the channel one broadened by molecular diffusion and migration due to out-of-axis electric fields between the injection nozzle and the zone of homogeneous velocity (see Supporting Information).
35. Gosse, C.; Boutorine, A.; Aujard, I.; Chami, M.; Kononov, A.; Cogné-Laage, E.; Alemand, J.-F.; Li, J.; Jullien, L. J. Phys. Chem. B 2004, 108, 6485-6497.
36. Huang, L. R.; Tegenfeldt, J. O.; Kraeft, J. J.; Sturm, J. C.; Austin, R. H.; Cox, E. C. Nat. Biotechnol. 2002, 20, 1048-1051.
37. Zhang, C.-X.; Manz, A. Anal. Chem. 2003, 75, 5759-5766.
38. Huang, L. R.; Tegenfeldt, J. O.; Kraeft, J. J.; Sturm, J. C.; Austin, R. H.; Cox, E. C. Tech. Dig.-Int. Electron Devices Meet. 2001, 363-366.
39. The bowed channels located on the injection side of the device were shortened to compensate for width reduction, thus keeping their overall resistance constant.
40. x, thus confirming the field homogeneity and direction.
41. The pillars that sustain the PDMS chamber ceiling also induce a perturbation of the electric potential. However, it is of the order of their diameter (i.e., 30 μm) and exerts no significant influence on the analyte migration.
42. Hjertén, S. J. Chromatogr., A 1985, 347, 191-198.
43. Doherty, E. A S.; Berglund, K D.; Buchholz, B. A; Kourkine, I. V.; Przybycien; T. M.; Tilton, R D.; Barron, A. E. Electrophoresis 2002, 23, 2766-2776.
44. Andreev, V. P.; Dubrovsky, S. G.; Stepanov, Y. V. J. Microcolumn Sep. 1997, 9, 443-450.
45. Ross, D.; Johnson, T.J.; Locascio, L.E. Anal. Chem. 2001, 73, 2509-2515.
46. Bianchi, F.; Wagner, F.; Hoffmann, P.; Girault, H. H. Anal. Chem. 2001, 73, 829-836.
47. EO in 0.1 % PDMA was evaluated to be less than 10% of the apparent electrophoretic mobility for all the considered analytes; see ref 43 and: Zhang, P.; Ren, J. Anal Chim. Acta 2004, 507, 179-184.
48. 7,45 For the two filling media, the good agreement between the apparent diffusion coefficients extracted from time-based as well as continuous experiments strongly supports the absence of any significant electric field-induced dispersion in the present systems.
49. As evaluated from Mark-Houwink parameters (Heller, C. Electrophoresis 1999, 20, 1962-1977), 0.1 % (w/w) PDMA approximately corresponds to the entanglement threshold for the 3-MDa polymer. Thus, slight viscosity or steric effects might be present.
50. Stellwagen, E.; Lu, Y.; Stellwagen, N. C. Biochemistry 2003, 42, 11745-11750.
51. Pappaert, K.; Biesemans, J.; Clicq, D.; Vankrunkelsven, S.; Desmet, G. Lab Chip 2005, 5, 1104-1110.
52. Nkodo, A. E.; Garnier, J. M.; Tinland, B.; Ren, H.; Desruisseaux, C.; McCormick, L. C.; Drouin, G.; Slater, G. W. Electrophoresis 2001, 22, 2424-2432.
53. Liu, M. K.; Giddings, J. C. Macromolecules 1993, 26, 3576-3588.
54. Smith, D. E.; Perkins, T. T.; Chu, S. Macromolecules 1996, 29, 1372-1373.
55. Gordon, G. W.; Chazotte, B.; Wang, X. F.; Herman, B. Biophys. J. 1995, 68, 766-778.
56. Periasamy, N.; Verkman, A. S. Biophys. J. 1998, 75, 557-567.
57. j.
58. A sum of two Gaussian functions failed to fit the stationary migration - diffusion pattern in the direct space, thus emphasizing the strength of Fourier data analysis.
59. From independent bulk measurements, we estimated the chemical relaxation time for all the injected duplexes to be at least 1 order of magnitude longer than the analysis duration. Consequently, the present technique provides information on the composition of the reactive mixture, which can be considered as frozen at equilibrium.
60. Aboul-ela, F.; Koh, D.; Tinoco, I., Jr.; Martin, F. H. Nucleic Acids Res. 1985, 13, 4811-4825.