Abstract
Background Micropatterning techniques of animal cells have been reported by numerous groups and fall into 6 major classifications (1). There are 1) photolithography, 2) soft lithography, 3) ink jet printing, 4) electron beam writing, 5) electrochemical desorption of self-assembled monolayers, and 6) dielectrophoresis. These six cell micropatterning techniques cannot modulate both the attachment and detachment of animal cells iteratively at the same positions, however. The present work has demonstrated that a weak electrical potential can modulate the attachment and detachment of specifically positioned adhesive animal cells using a patterned indium tin oxide (ITO)/ glass electrode culture system [1], (Figure 1).
Highlights
Micropatterning techniques of animal cells have been reported by numerous groups and fall into 6 major classifications (1)
Modulated attachment and detachment of animal cells cultured on an ITO patterning electrode surface
Animal cells suspended in serum or sera containing medium were drawn to and attached on a reticulate ITO electrode region to which a +0.4-V vs. Ag/AgCl-positive potential was applied
Summary
Micropatterning techniques of animal cells have been reported by numerous groups and fall into 6 major classifications (1). There are 1) photolithography, 2) soft lithography, 3) ink jet printing, 4) electron beam writing, 5) electrochemical desorption of self-assembled monolayers, and 6) dielectrophoresis. These six cell micropatterning techniques cannot modulate both the attachment and detachment of animal cells iteratively at the same positions, . The present work has demonstrated that a weak electrical potential can modulate the attachment and detachment of positioned adhesive animal cells using a patterned indium tin oxide (ITO)/ glass electrode culture system [1], (Figure 1)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have