Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,149

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ultrahigh-throughput screening in drop-based microfluidics for directed evolution

Open access
Agresti, Jeremy J., Antipov, Eugene, Abate, Adam R., Ahn, Keunho, Rowat, Amy C., Baret, Jean-Christophe, Marquez, Manuel, Klibanov, Alexander M., Griffiths, Andrew D., Weitz, David A.·2010·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

The explosive growth in our knowledge of genomes, proteomes, and metabolomes is driving ever-increasing fundamental understanding of the biochemistry of life, enabling qualitatively new studies of complex biological systems and their evolution. This knowledge also drives modern biotechnologies, such as molecular engineering and synthetic biology, which have enormous potential to address urgent problems, including developing potent new drugs and providing environmentally friendly energy. Many of these studies, however, are ultimately limited by their need for even-higher-throughput measurements of biochemical reactions. We present a general ultrahigh-throughput screening platform using drop-based microfluidics that overcomes these limitations and revolutionizes both the scale and speed of screening. We use aqueous drops dispersed in oil as picoliter-volume reaction vessels and screen them at rates of thousands per second. To demonstrate its power, we apply the system to directed evolution, identifying new mutants of the enzyme horseradish peroxidase exhibiting catalytic rates more than 10 times faster than their parent, which is already a very efficient enzyme. We exploit the ultrahigh throughput to use an initial purifying selection that removes inactive mutants; we identify ∼100 variants comparable in activity to the parent from an initial population of ∼10 7 . After a second generation of mutagenesis and high-stringency screening, we identify several significantly improved mutants, some approaching diffusion-limited efficiency. In total, we screen ∼10 8 individual enzyme reactions in only 10 h, using < 150 μL of total reagent volume; compared to state-of-the-art robotic screening systems, we perform the entire assay with a 1,000-fold increase in speed and a 1-million-fold reduction in cost.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0910781107

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Agresti, J. J., Antipov, E., Abate, A. R., Ahn, K., Rowat, A. C., Baret, J.-C., Marquez, M., Klibanov, A. M., Griffiths, A. D., & Weitz, D. A.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2010-02-08
Volume
107
Issue
9
Pages
4004-4009
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2118131251
Cited by
1,149
References
1
FWCI
42.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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.