ArticleBiomicrofluidics2013
Stretching DNA by electric field and flow field in microfluidic devices: An experimental validation to the devices designed with computer simulations.
Article in Biomicrofluidics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Polyelectrolyte in Electric Field: Disparate Conformational Behavior along an Aminopolysaccharide Chain.ACS omega · 2020Article
- Collapse of DNA under alternating electric fields.Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics · 2015Article
- Simulations of DNA stretching by flow field in microchannels with complex geometry.Biomicrofluidics · 2014Article
- Simulation of single DNA molecule stretching and immobilization in a de-wetting two-phase flow over micropillar-patterned surface.Biomicrofluidics · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We examined the performance of three microfluidic devices for stretching DNA. The first device is a microchannel with a contraction, and the remaining two are the modifications to the first. The modified designs were made with the help of computer simulations [C. C. Hsieh and T. H. Lin, Biomicrofluidics 5(4), 044106 (2011) and C. C. Hsieh, T. H. Lin, and C. D. Huang, Biomicrofluidics 6, 044105 (2012)] and they were optimized for operating with electric field. In our experiments, we first used DC electric field to stretch DNA. However, the experimental results were not even in qualitative agreement with our simulations. More detailed investigation revealed that DNA molecules adopt a globular conformation in high DC field and therefore become more difficult to stretch. Owing to the similarity between flow field and electric field, we turned to use flow field to stretch DNA with the same devices. The evolution patterns of DNA conformation in flow field were found qualitatively the same as our prediction based on electric field. We analyzed the maximum values, the evolution and the distributions of DNA extension at different Deborah number in each device. We found that the shear and the hydrodynamic interaction have significant influence on the performance of the devices.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.