Advertisement

Microfluidics and Nanofluidics

, Volume 15, Issue 5, pp 599–609 | Cite as

Simultaneous electrokinetic flow and dielectrophoretic trapping using perpendicular static and dynamic electric fields

  • Michael B. Sano
  • Roberto C. Gallo-Villanueva
  • Blanca H. Lapizco-Encinas
  • Rafael V. Davalos
Research Paper

Abstract

Microfluidics is a rapidly growing field that offers great potential for many biological and analytical applications. There are important advantages that miniaturization has to offer, such as portability, shorter response times, higher resolution and sensitivity. There is growing interest on the development of microscale techniques. Among these, electrokinetic phenomena have gained significant importance due to their flexibility for handling bioparticles. Dielectrophoresis (DEP), the manipulation of particles in non-uniform electric fields due to polarization effects, has become one of leading electrokinetic techniques. DEP has been successfully employed to manipulate proteins, DNA and a wide array of cells, form bacteria to cancer. Contactless DEP (cDEP) is a novel dielectrophoretic mode with attractive characteristics. In cDEP, non-uniform electric fields are created using insulating structures and external electrodes that are separated from the sample by a thin insulating barrier. This prevents bioparticle damage and makes cDEP a technique of choice for many biomedical applications. In this study, a combination of cDEP generated with AC potentials and electrokinetic liquid pumping generated with DC potentials is employed to achieve highly controlled particle trapping and manipulation. This allows for lower applied potentials than those used in traditional insulator-based DEP and requires a simpler sytem that does not employ an external pump. This is the first demonstration of electrokinetic (EK) pumping in which the driving electrodes are not in direct contact with the sample fluid. Multiphysics simulations were used to aid with the design of the system and predict the regions of particle trapping. Results show the advantages of combining AC-cDEP with DC EK liquid pumping for dynamic microparticle trapping, release and enrichment.

Keywords

Microfluidics Numerical model Electrokinetic micropump Electro-osmosis Contactless dielectrophoresis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was funded in part by the Multiscale Bio-Engineered Devices and Systems (MBEDS) group and the Institute for Critical Technology and Applied Science (ICTAS) at Virginia Tech. Additional funding was provided by CONACYT and Cátedra de Investigación CAT142 of Tecnológico de Monterrey. The authors would like to thank the members of the VT BEMS laboratory, especially Alireza Salmanzadeh, for their help fabricating the silicon master stamps.

Conflict of interest

Sano and Davalos have a pending patent for contactless dielectrophoresis.

References

  1. Bao N, Wang J, Lu C (2008) Recent advances in electric analysis of cells in microfluidic systems. Anal Bioanal Chem 391:933–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barz DPJ, Ehrhard P (2005) Model and verification of electrokinetic flow and transport in a micro-electrophoresis device. Lab Chip 5:949–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baylon-Cardiel JL, Lapizco-Encinas BH, Reyes-Betanzo C, Chávez-Santoscoy AV, Martínez Chapa SO (2009) Prediction of trapping zones in an insulator-based dielectrophoretic device. Lab Chip 9:2896–2901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baylon-Cardiel JL, Jesús-Pérez NM, Chávez-Santoscoy AV, Lapizco-Encinas BH (2010) Controlled microparticle manipulation employing low frequency alternating electric fields in an array of insulators. Lab Chip 10:3235–3242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhattacharya S, Chao T-C, Ros A (2011) Insulator-based dielectrophoretic single particle and single cancer cell trapping. Electrophoresis 32:2550–2558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chávez-Santoscoy AV, Baylon-Cardiel JL, Moncada-Hernández H, Lapizco-Encinas BH (2011) On the selectivity of an insulator-based dielectrophoretic microdevice. Sep Sci Technol 46:384–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cummings EB, Singh AK (2003) Dielectrophoresis in microchips containing arrays of insulating posts: theoretical and experimental results. Anal Chem 75:4724–4731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Docoslis A, Kalogerakis N, Behie LA, Kaler K (1997) A novel dielectrophoresis-based device for the selective retention of viable cells in cell culture media. Biotechnol Bioeng 54:239–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ermolina I, Milner J, Morgan H (2006) Dielectrophoretic investigation of plant virus particles: cow pea mosaic virus and tobacco mosaic virus. Electrophoresis 27:3939–3948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Felten M, Geggier P, Jäger M, Duschl C (2006) Controlling electrohydrodynamic pumping in microchannels through defined temperature fields. Phys Fluids 18:051707Google Scholar
  11. Feng J-F, Liu J, Zhang X-Z, Zhang L, Jiang J-Y, Nolta J, Zhao M (2012) Guided migration of neural stem cells derived from human embryonic stem cells by an electric field. Stem Cells 30:349–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gagnon ZR (2011) Cellular dielectrophoresis: applications to the characterization, manipulation, separation and patterning of cells. Electrophoresis 32:2466–2487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gallo-Villanueva RC, Rodriguez-Lopez CE, Diaz-De-La-Garza RI, Reyes-Betanzo C, Lapizco-Encinas BH (2009) DNA manipulation by means of insulator-based dielectrophoresis employing direct current electric fields. Electrophoresis 30:4195–4205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gallo-Villanueva RC, Jesús-Pérez NM, Martínez-López JI, Pacheco A, Lapizco-Encinas BH (2011a) Assessment of microalgae viability employing insulator-based dielectrophoresis. Microfluid Nanofluid 10:1305–1315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gallo-Villanueva RC, Pérez-González VH, Davalos RV, Lapizco-Encinas BH (2011b) Separation of mixtures of particles in a multipart microdevice employing insulator-based dielectrophoresis. Electrophoresis 32:2456–2465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gencoglu A, Camacho-Alanis F, Nguyen VT, Nakano A, Ros A, Minerick AR (2011) Quantification of pH gradients and implications in insulator-based dielectrophoresis of biomolecules. Electrophoresis 32:2436–2447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hawkins BG, Kirby BJ (2010) Electrothermal flow effects in insulating (electrodeless) dielectrophoresis systems. Electrophoresis 31:3622–3633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Henslee EA, Sano MB, Rojas AD, Schmelz EM, Davalos RV (2011) Selective concentration of human cancer cells using contactless dielectrophoresis. Electrophoresis 32:2523–2529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Homsy A, Linder V, Lucklum F, de Rooij NF (2007) Magnetohydrodynamic pumping in nuclear magnetic resonance environments. Sens Actuators B Chem 123:636–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hughes MP, Hoettges KF (2008) Bacterial concentration, separation and analysis by dielectrophoresis. In: Zourob M, Elwary S, Turner A (eds) Principles of bacterial detection: biosensors, recognition receptors and microsystems. Springer, New York, pp 895–907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Iverson BD, Garimella SV (2008) Recent advances in microscale pumping technologies: a review and evaluation. Microfluid Nanofluid 5:145–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ivory CF, Srivastava SK (2011) Direct current dielectrophoretic simulation of proteins using an array of circular insulating posts. Electrophoresis 32:2323–2330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jaramillo MdC, Torrents E, Martínez-Duarte R, Madou MJ, Juárez A (2010) On-line separation of bacterial cells by carbon-electrode dielectrophoresis. Electrophoresis 31:2921–2928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jones P, Staton S, Hayes M (2011) Blood cell capture in a sawtooth dielectrophoretic microchannel. Anal Bioanal Chem 401:2103–2111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kang YJ, Li DQ (2009) Electrokinetic motion of particles and cells in microchannels. Microfluid Nanofluid 6:431–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kwon J-S, Maeng J-S, Chun M-S, Song S (2008) Improvement of microchannel geometry subject to electrokinesis and dielectrophoresis using numerical simulations. Microfluid Nanofluid 5:23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lapizco-Encinas BH, Ozuna-Chacón S, Rito-Palomares M (2008) Protein manipulation with insulator-based dielectrophoresis and DC electric fields. J Chromatogr A 1206:45–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Leonard KM, Minerick AR (2011) Explorations of ABO-Rh antigen expressions on erythrocyte dielectrophoresis: changes in cross-over frequency. Electrophoresis 32:2512–2522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lin Q, Yang BZ, Xie J, Tai YC (2007) Dynamic simulation of a peristaltic micropump considering coupled fluid flow and structural motion. J Micromech Microeng 17:220–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Machauf A, Nemirovsky Y, Dinnar U (2005) A membrane micropump electrostatically actuated across the working fluid. J Micromech Microeng 15:2309–2316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Martinez-Duarte R, Gorkin-Iii RA, Abi-Samra K, Madou MJ (2010) The integration of 3D carbon-electrode dielectrophoresis on a CD-like centrifugal microfluidic platform. Lab Chip 10:1030–1043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martinez-Duarte R, Renaud P, Madou MJ (2011) A novel approach to dielectrophoresis using carbon electrodes. Electrophoresis 32:2385–2392Google Scholar
  33. Matteucci M, Perennes F, Marmiroli B, Miotti P, Vaccari L, Gosparini A, Turchet A, Di Fabrizio E (2006) Compact micropumping system based on LIGA fabricated microparts. Microelectron Eng 83:1288–1290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Moncada-Hernández H, Lapizco-Encinas BH (2010) Simultaneous concentration and separation of microorganisms: insulator-based dielectrophoretic approach. Anal Bioanal Chem 396(5):1805–1816Google Scholar
  35. Moncada-Hernández H, Baylon-Cardiel JL, Pérez-González VH, Lapizco-Encinas BH (2011) Insulator-based dielectrophoresis of microorganisms: theoretical and experimental results. Electrophoresis 32:2502–2511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pohl HA (1958) Some effects of nonuniform fields on dielectrics. J Appl Phys 29:1182–1188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pysher MD, Hayes MA (2007) Electrophoretic and dielectrophoretic field gradient technique for separating bioparticles. Anal Chem 79:4552–4557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Regtmeier J, Eichhorn R, Bogunovic L, Ros A, Anselmetti D (2010) Dielectrophoretic trapping and polarizability of DNA: the role of spatial conformation. Anal Chem 82:7141–7149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sano MB, Caldwell JL, Davalos RV (2011a) Modeling and development of a low frequency contactless dielectrophoresis (cDEP) platform to sort cancer cells from dilute whole blood samples. Biosens Bioelectron 30:13–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sano MB, Henslee EA, Schmelz E, Davalos RV (2011b) Contactless dielectrophoretic spectroscopy: examination of the dielectric properties of cells found in blood. Electrophoresis 32:3164–3171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shafiee H, Caldwell JL, Sano MB, Davalos RV (2009) Contactless dielectrophoresis: a new technique for cell manipulation. Biomed Microdevices 11:997–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shafiee H, Caldwell JL, Davalos RV (2010a) A microfluidic system for biological particle enrichment using contactless dielectrophoresis. Jala 15:224–232Google Scholar
  43. Shafiee H, Sano MB, Henslee EA, Caldwell JL, Davalos RV (2010b) Selective isolation of live/dead cells using contactless dielectrophoresis (cDEP). Lab Chip 10:438–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sridharan S, Zhu J, Hu G, Xuan X (2011) Joule heating effects on electroosmotic flow in insulator-based dielectrophoresis. Electrophoresis 32:2274–2281Google Scholar
  45. Srivastava SK, Artemiou A, Minerick AR (2011a) Direct current insulator-based dielectrophoretic characterization of erythrocytes: ABO-Rh human blood typing. Electrophoresis 32:2530–2540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Srivastava SK, Gencoglu A, Minerick AR (2011b) DC insulator dielectrophoretic applications in microdevice technology: a review. Anal Bioanal Chem 399:301–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sun Y-S, Peng S-W, Lin K-H, Cheng J-Y (2012) Electrotaxis of lung cancer cells in ordered three-dimensional scaffolds. Biomicrofluidics 6:014102–014114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tandon V, Bhagavatula SK, Nelson WC, Kirby BJ (2008) Zeta potential and electroosmotic mobility in microfluidic devices fabricated from hydrophobic polymers: 1. The origins of charge. Electrophoresis 29:1092–1101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ugaz VM, Christensen JL (2007) Electrophoresis in microfluidic system. In: Hardt S, Schonfeld F (eds) Microfluidic technologies for miniaturized analysis systems. Springer, New York, pp 393–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Voldman J (2006) Electrical forces for microscale cell manipulation. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 8:425–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Voyer D, Frenea-Robin M, Buret F, Nicolas L (2010) Improvements in the extraction of cell electric properties from their electrorotation spectrum. Bioelectrochemistry 79:25–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Whitesides GM (2006) The origins and the future of microfluidics. Nature 442:368–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Yang L, Bashir R (2008) Electrical/electrochemical impedance for rapid detection of foodborne pathogenic bacteria. Biotechnol Adv 26:135–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yang F, Yang X, Jiang H, Bulkhaults P, Wood P, Hrushesky W, Wang G (2010) Dielectrophoretic separation of colorectal cancer cells. Biomicrofluidics 4:013204–013213CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael B. Sano
    • 1
  • Roberto C. Gallo-Villanueva
    • 1
    • 2
  • Blanca H. Lapizco-Encinas
    • 3
  • Rafael V. Davalos
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Biomedical Engineering and SciencesVirginia Tech-Wake Forest UniversityBlacksburgUSA
  2. 2.BioMEMS Research ChairTecnólogico de MonterreyMonterreyMexico
  3. 3.Department of Chemical and Biomedical EngineeringRochester Institute of TechnologyRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations