Cell electroporation by CNT-featured microfluidic chip
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the application of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) for cell electroporation that is performed in a microfluidic device. Lab on a chip (LOC) developments have raised unique possibilities to scale down cell manipulation systems to a cellular level to achieve higher performance and accuracy. Among the systems employed for cell disruption, electroporation without chemical reagents provides many advantages but suffers from high voltage requirements. We have exploited the electric field enhancement by CNTs to realize low-voltage electroporation. A microchip with embedded aligned CNTs has been developed to test the effect of the enhanced electric field on electroporation of mammalian CHO cells. Fluorogenic Calcein AM dye is used to image the release of the intercellular medium as an indication of electroporation. The electroporation phenomenon is recorded in real-time and compared with that of a device without CNTs. The results show that at a voltage as low as 3 volts, the electroporation yield rate is increased by 72% with the incorporation of CNTs. This enhancement is a promising advancement towards integration of low-voltage electroporation with other low-voltage cell manipulation techniques.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".