The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Microfabricated platform for studying stem cell fates
Abstract
Platforms that allow parallel, quantitative analysis of single cells will be integral to realizing the potential of postgenomic biology. In stem cell biology, the study of clonal stem cells in multiwell formats is currently both inefficient and time‐consuming. Thus, to investigate low‐frequency events of interest, large sample sizes must be interrogated. We report a simple, versatile, and efficient micropatterned arraying system conducive to the culture and dynamic monitoring of stem cell proliferation. This platform enables: 1) parallel, automated, long‐term (∼days to weeks), live‐cell microscopy of single cells in culture; 2) tracking of individual cell fates over time (proliferation, apoptosis); and 3) correlation of differentiated progeny with founder clones. To achieve these goals, we used microfabrication techniques to create an array of ∼10,000 microwells on a glass coverslip. The dimensions of the wells are tunable, ranging from 20 to >500 μm in diameter and 10–500 μm in height. The microarray can be coated with adhesive proteins and is integrated into a culture chamber that permits rapid (∼min), addressable monitoring of each well using a standard programmable microscope stage. All cells share the same media (including paracrine survival signals), as opposed to cells in multiwell formats. The incorporation of a coverslip as a substrate also renders the platform compatible with conventional, high‐magnification light and fluorescent microscopy. We validated this approach by analyzing the proliferation dynamics of a heterogeneous adult rat neural stem cell population. Using this platform, one can further interrogate the response of distinct stem cell subpopulations to microenvironmental cues (mitogens, cell–cell interactions, and cell–extracellular matrix interactions) that govern their behavior. In the future, the platform may also be adapted for the study of other cell types by tailoring the surface coatings, microwell dimensions, and culture environment, thereby enabling parallel investigation of many distinct cellular responses. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bhatia, S. N., Balis, U. J., Yarmush, M. L., & Toner, M. (1999) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fasebj.13.14.1883 · Cited by 890
Self-citation
Cited by
Dynamic single cell culture array
Carlo, D. D., Wu, L. Y., & Lee, L. P. (2006) · Lab on a Chip · doi:10.1039/b605937f · Cited by 707
Microfluidic Devices for Bioapplications
Yeo, L. Y., Chang, H., Chan, P. P. Y., & Friend, J. R. (2011) · Small · doi:10.1002/smll.201000946 · Cited by 622
Engineered Microenvironments for Controlled Stem Cell Differentiation
Burdick, J. A., & Vunjak-Novakovic, G. (2009) · Tissue Engineering Part A · doi:10.1089/ten.tea.2008.0131 · Cited by 485
Microfluidics technology for manipulation and analysis of biological cells
Yi, C., Li, C.-W., Ji, S., & Yang, M. (2006) · Analytica Chimica Acta · doi:10.1016/j.aca.2005.12.037 · Cited by 478
Artificial niche microarrays for probing single stem cell fate in high throughput
Gobaa, S., Hoehnel, S., Roccio, M., Negro, A., Kobel, S., & Lutolf, M. P. (2011) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.1732 · Cited by 390
Metadata
- Authors
- Chin, V. I., Taupin, P., Sanga, S., Scheel, J., Gage, F. H., & Bhatia, S. N.
- Venue
- Biotechnology and Bioengineering
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-10-14
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 399-415
- ISSN
- 0006-3592 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0290
- OpenAlex
- W2164527416
- Cited by
- 202
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.