Miniaturisation of analytical steps: necessity and snobbism

Abstract

Automation and miniaturization were two widespread trends implicitly included in the research priorities of most scientific fields in the last few decades of the twentieth century. One result of the latter trend was the development of microtechnology, which has by now been superseded by nanotechnology by virtue of the advantages of small devices over macroscale systems. Analytical chemistry has also taken advantage of these trends in general and of nanotechnology in particular. The advantages thus gained include accurate spatial control over reagents and samples, increased throughput, automatability—which is absolutely mandatory, the ability to handle picoliter volumes of undiluted reactants—which saves reagents and sample, compatibility with a wide range of detection systems, the availability of a variety of materials for manufacturing at relatively low cost, design flexibility, the ability to perform multiple tasks (e.g. for the simultaneous development of several sample-preparation steps such as dissolution, extraction, or preconcentration) and improvements derived from the reduced dimensions used (e.g. in nanochromatography or chip-based separations). The development of portable miniaturized devices has facilitated the decentralization of analyses, a primary goal for this century, by enabling real time, in situ, on-line, in-vivo monitoring of processes without the need for skilled operators or special equipment [1]. There is no doubt that miniaturization and nanotechnology have contributed enormously to the emergence and development of new research areas which have brought about true revolutions, particularly in bioanalysis.