Figure 3. (a) Velocity distribution in a section perpendicular to the flow for rectangular (left) and Ushaped (right) cross section channels, and (b) particle location in these cross sections.

Cristina González Fernández,1 Jenifer Gómez Pastora,2 Arantza Basauri,1 Marcos Fallanza,1 Eugenio Bringas,1 Jeffrey J. Chalmers,2 and Inmaculada Ortiz1,*
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer

생체 유체에서 자성 입자의 연속 흐름 분리 : 마이크로 장치 형상이 분리 성능을 어떻게 결정합니까?

Abstract

The use of functionalized magnetic particles for the detection or separation of multiple chemicals and biomolecules from biofluids continues to attract significant attention. After their incubation with the targeted substances, the beads can be magnetically recovered to perform analysis or diagnostic tests. Particle recovery with permanent magnets in continuous-flow microdevices has gathered great attention in the last decade due to the multiple advantages of microfluidics. As such, great efforts have been made to determine the magnetic and fluidic conditions for achieving complete particle capture; however, less attention has been paid to the effect of the channel geometry on the system performance, although it is key for designing systems that simultaneously provide high particle recovery and flow rates. Herein, we address the optimization of Y-Y-shaped microchannels, where magnetic beads are separated from blood and collected into a buffer stream by applying an external magnetic field. The influence of several geometrical features (namely cross section shape, thickness, length, and volume) on both bead recovery and system throughput is studied. For that purpose, we employ an experimentally validated Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) numerical model that considers the dominant forces acting on the beads during separation. Our results indicate that rectangular, long devices display the best performance as they deliver high particle recovery and high throughput. Thus, this methodology could be applied to the rational design of lab-on-a-chip devices for any magnetically driven purification, enrichment or isolation.

생체 유체에서 여러 화학 물질과 생체 분자의 검출 또는 분리를 위한 기능화된 자성 입자의 사용은 계속해서 상당한 관심을 받고 있습니다. 표적 물질과 함께 배양 한 후 비드는 자기적으로 회수되어 분석 또는 진단 테스트를 수행 할 수 있습니다.

연속 흐름 마이크로 장치에서 영구 자석을 사용한 입자 회수는 마이크로 유체의 여러 장점으로 인해 지난 10 년 동안 큰 관심을 모았습니다. 따라서 완전한 입자 포획을 달성하기 위한 자기 및 유체 조건을 결정하기 위해 많은 노력을 기울였습니다.

그러나 높은 입자 회수율과 유속을 동시에 제공하는 시스템을 설계하는데 있어 핵심이기는 하지만 시스템 성능에 대한 채널 형상의 영향에 대해서는 덜 주의를 기울였습니다.

여기에서 우리는 자기 비드가 혈액에서 분리되어 외부 자기장을 적용하여 버퍼 스트림으로 수집되는 Y-Y 모양의 마이크로 채널의 최적화를 다룹니다. 비드 회수 및 시스템 처리량에 대한 여러 기하학적 특징 (즉, 단면 형상, 두께, 길이 및 부피)의 영향을 연구합니다.

이를 위해 분리 중에 비드에 작용하는 지배적인 힘을 고려하는 실험적으로 검증된 CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) 수치 모델을 사용합니다.

우리의 결과는 직사각형의 긴 장치가 높은 입자 회수율과 높은 처리량을 제공하기 때문에 최고의 성능을 보여줍니다. 따라서 이 방법론은 자기 구동 정제, 농축 또는 분리를 위한 랩 온어 칩 장치의 합리적인 설계에 적용될 수 있습니다.

Keywords: particle magnetophoresis, CFD, cross section, chip fabrication

Figure 1 (a) Top view of the microfluidic-magnetophoretic device, (b) Schematic representation of the channel cross-sections studied in this work, and (c) the magnet position relative to the channel location (Sepy and Sepz are the magnet separation distances in y and z, respectively).
Figure 1 (a) Top view of the microfluidic-magnetophoretic device, (b) Schematic representation of the channel cross-sections studied in this work, and (c) the magnet position relative to the channel location (Sepy and Sepz are the magnet separation distances in y and z, respectively).
Figure 2. (a) Channel-magnet configuration and (b–d) magnetic force distribution in the channel midplane for 2 mm, 5 mm and 10 mm long rectangular (left) and U-shaped (right) devices.
Figure 2. (a) Channel-magnet configuration and (b–d) magnetic force distribution in the channel midplane for 2 mm, 5 mm and 10 mm long rectangular (left) and U-shaped (right) devices.
Figure 3. (a) Velocity distribution in a section perpendicular to the flow for rectangular (left) and Ushaped (right) cross section channels, and (b) particle location in these cross sections.
Figure 3. (a) Velocity distribution in a section perpendicular to the flow for rectangular (left) and Ushaped (right) cross section channels, and (b) particle location in these cross sections.
Figure 4. Influence of fluid flow rate on particle recovery when the applied magnetic force is (a) different and (b) equal in U-shaped and rectangular cross section microdevices.
Figure 4. Influence of fluid flow rate on particle recovery when the applied magnetic force is (a) different and (b) equal in U-shaped and rectangular cross section microdevices.
Figure 5. Magnetic bead capture as a function of fluid flow rate for all of the studied geometries.
Figure 5. Magnetic bead capture as a function of fluid flow rate for all of the studied geometries.
Figure 6. Influence of (a) magnetic and fluidic forces (J parameter) and (b) channel geometry (θ parameter) on particle recovery. Note that U-2mm does not accurately fit a line.
Figure 6. Influence of (a) magnetic and fluidic forces (J parameter) and (b) channel geometry (θ parameter) on particle recovery. Note that U-2mm does not accurately fit a line.
Figure 7. Dependence of bead capture on the (a) functional channel volume, and (b) particle residence time (tres). Note that in the curve fitting expressions V represents the functional channel volume and that U-2mm does not accurately fit a line.
Figure 7. Dependence of bead capture on the (a) functional channel volume, and (b) particle residence time (tres). Note that in the curve fitting expressions V represents the functional channel volume and that U-2mm does not accurately fit a line.

References

  1. Gómez-Pastora J., Xue X., Karampelas I.H., Bringas E., Furlani E.P., Ortiz I. Analysis of separators for magnetic beads recovery: From large systems to multifunctional microdevices. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2017;172:16–31. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2016.07.050. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Wise N., Grob T., Morten K., Thompson I., Sheard S. Magnetophoretic velocities of superparamagnetic particles, agglomerates and complexes. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2015;384:328–334. doi: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2015.02.031. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Khashan S.A., Elnajjar E., Haik Y. CFD simulation of the magnetophoretic separation in a microchannel. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2011;323:2960–2967. doi: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2011.06.001. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Khashan S.A., Furlani E.P. Scalability analysis of magnetic bead separation in a microchannel with an array of soft magnetic elements in a uniform magnetic field. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2014;125:311–318. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2014.02.007. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Furlani E.P. Magnetic biotransport: Analysis and applications. Materials. 2010;3:2412–2446. doi: 10.3390/ma3042412. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Gómez-Pastora J., Bringas E., Ortiz I. Design of novel adsorption processes for the removal of arsenic from polluted groundwater employing functionalized magnetic nanoparticles. Chem. Eng. Trans. 2016;47:241–246. [Google Scholar]
  7. Gómez-Pastora J., Bringas E., Lázaro-Díez M., Ramos-Vivas J., Ortiz I. The reverse of controlled release: Controlled sequestration of species and biotoxins into nanoparticles (NPs) In: Stroeve P., Mahmoudi M., editors. Drug Delivery Systems. World Scientific; Hackensack, NJ, USA: 2017. pp. 207–244. [Google Scholar]
  8. Ruffert C. Magnetic bead-magic bullet. Micromachines. 2016;7:21. doi: 10.3390/mi7020021. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Yáñez-Sedeño P., Campuzano S., Pingarrón J.M. Magnetic particles coupled to disposable screen printed transducers for electrochemical biosensing. Sensors. 2016;16:1585. doi: 10.3390/s16101585. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Schrittwieser S., Pelaz B., Parak W.J., Lentijo-Mozo S., Soulantica K., Dieckhoff J., Ludwig F., Guenther A., Tschöpe A., Schotter J. Homogeneous biosensing based on magnetic particle labels. Sensors. 2016;16:828. doi: 10.3390/s16060828. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. He J., Huang M., Wang D., Zhang Z., Li G. Magnetic separation techniques in sample preparation for biological analysis: A review. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 2014;101:84–101. doi: 10.1016/j.jpba.2014.04.017. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Ha Y., Ko S., Kim I., Huang Y., Mohanty K., Huh C., Maynard J.A. Recent advances incorporating superparamagnetic nanoparticles into immunoassays. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2018;1:512–521. doi: 10.1021/acsanm.7b00025. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Gómez-Pastora J., González-Fernández C., Fallanza M., Bringas E., Ortiz I. Flow patterns and mass transfer performance of miscible liquid-liquid flows in various microchannels: Numerical and experimental studies. Chem. Eng. J. 2018;344:487–497. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2018.03.110. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. Gale B.K., Jafek A.R., Lambert C.J., Goenner B.L., Moghimifam H., Nze U.C., Kamarapu S.K. A review of current methods in microfluidic device fabrication and future commercialization prospects. Inventions. 2018;3:60. doi: 10.3390/inventions3030060. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Niemeyer C.M., Mirkin C.A., editors. Nanobiotechnology; Concepts, Applications and Perspectives. Wiley-VCH; Weinheim, Germany: 2004. [Google Scholar]
  16. Khashan S.A., Dagher S., Alazzam A., Mathew B., Hilal-Alnaqbi A. Microdevice for continuous flow magnetic separation for bioengineering applications. J. Micromech. Microeng. 2017;27:055016. doi: 10.1088/1361-6439/aa666d. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Basauri A., Gomez-Pastora J., Fallanza M., Bringas E., Ortiz I. Predictive model for the design of reactive micro-separations. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2019;209:900–907. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2018.09.028. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Abdollahi P., Karimi-Sabet J., Moosavian M.A., Amini Y. Microfluidic solvent extraction of calcium: Modeling and optimization of the process variables. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2020;231:115875. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2019.115875. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Khashan S.A., Alazzam A., Furlani E. A novel design for a microfluidic magnetophoresis system: Computational study; Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Fluid Control, Measurement and Visualization (FLUCOME2013); Nara, Japan. 18–23 November 2013. [Google Scholar]
  20. Pamme N. Magnetism and microfluidics. Lab Chip. 2006;6:24–38. doi: 10.1039/B513005K. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Gómez-Pastora J., Amiri Roodan V., Karampelas I.H., Alorabi A.Q., Tarn M.D., Iles A., Bringas E., Paunov V.N., Pamme N., Furlani E.P., et al. Two-step numerical approach to predict ferrofluid droplet generation and manipulation inside multilaminar flow chambers. J. Phys. Chem. C. 2019;123:10065–10080. doi: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.9b01393. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Gómez-Pastora J., Karampelas I.H., Bringas E., Furlani E.P., Ortiz I. Numerical analysis of bead magnetophoresis from flowing blood in a continuous-flow microchannel: Implications to the bead-fluid interactions. Sci. Rep. 2019;9:7265. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-43827-x. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Tarn M.D., Pamme N. On-Chip Magnetic Particle-Based Immunoassays Using Multilaminar Flow for Clinical Diagnostics. In: Taly V., Viovy J.L., Descroix S., editors. Microchip Diagnostics Methods and Protocols. Humana Press; New York, NY, USA: 2017. pp. 69–83. [Google Scholar]
  24. Phurimsak C., Tarn M.D., Peyman S.A., Greenman J., Pamme N. On-chip determination of c-reactive protein using magnetic particles in continuous flow. Anal. Chem. 2014;86:10552–10559. doi: 10.1021/ac5023265. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. Wu X., Wu H., Hu Y. Enhancement of separation efficiency on continuous magnetophoresis by utilizing L/T-shaped microchannels. Microfluid. Nanofluid. 2011;11:11–24. doi: 10.1007/s10404-011-0768-7. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. Vojtíšek M., Tarn M.D., Hirota N., Pamme N. Microfluidic devices in superconducting magnets: On-chip free-flow diamagnetophoresis of polymer particles and bubbles. Microfluid. Nanofluid. 2012;13:625–635. doi: 10.1007/s10404-012-0979-6. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  27. Gómez-Pastora J., González-Fernández C., Real E., Iles A., Bringas E., Furlani E.P., Ortiz I. Computational modeling and fluorescence microscopy characterization of a two-phase magnetophoretic microsystem for continuous-flow blood detoxification. Lab Chip. 2018;18:1593–1606. doi: 10.1039/C8LC00396C. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. Forbes T.P., Forry S.P. Microfluidic magnetophoretic separations of immunomagnetically labeled rare mammalian cells. Lab Chip. 2012;12:1471–1479. doi: 10.1039/c2lc40113d. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  29. Nandy K., Chaudhuri S., Ganguly R., Puri I.K. Analytical model for the magnetophoretic capture of magnetic microspheres in microfluidic devices. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2008;320:1398–1405. doi: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2007.11.024. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  30. Plouffe B.D., Lewis L.H., Murthy S.K. Computational design optimization for microfluidic magnetophoresis. Biomicrofluidics. 2011;5:013413. doi: 10.1063/1.3553239. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. Hale C., Darabi J. Magnetophoretic-based microfluidic device for DNA isolation. Biomicrofluidics. 2014;8:044118. doi: 10.1063/1.4893772. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  32. Becker H., Gärtner C. Polymer microfabrication methods for microfluidic analytical applications. Electrophoresis. 2000;21:12–26. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1522-2683(20000101)21:1<12::AID-ELPS12>3.0.CO;2-7. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. Pekas N., Zhang Q., Nannini M., Juncker D. Wet-etching of structures with straight facets and adjustable taper into glass substrates. Lab Chip. 2010;10:494–498. doi: 10.1039/B912770D. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  34. Wang T., Chen J., Zhou T., Song L. Fabricating microstructures on glass for microfluidic chips by glass molding process. Micromachines. 2018;9:269. doi: 10.3390/mi9060269. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  35. Castaño-Álvarez M., Pozo Ayuso D.F., García Granda M., Fernández-Abedul M.T., Rodríguez García J., Costa-García A. Critical points in the fabrication of microfluidic devices on glass substrates. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2008;130:436–448. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2007.09.043. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  36. Prakash S., Kumar S. Fabrication of microchannels: A review. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 2015;229:1273–1288. doi: 10.1177/0954405414535581. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  37. Leester-Schädel M., Lorenz T., Jürgens F., Ritcher C. Fabrication of Microfluidic Devices. In: Dietzel A., editor. Microsystems for Pharmatechnology: Manipulation of Fluids, Particles, Droplets, and Cells. Springer; Basel, Switzerland: 2016. pp. 23–57. [Google Scholar]
  38. Bartlett N.W., Wood R.J. Comparative analysis of fabrication methods for achieving rounded microchannels in PDMS. J. Micromech. Microeng. 2016;26:115013. doi: 10.1088/0960-1317/26/11/115013. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  39. Ng P.F., Lee K.I., Yang M., Fei B. Fabrication of 3D PDMS microchannels of adjustable cross-sections via versatile gel templates. Polymers. 2019;11:64. doi: 10.3390/polym11010064. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  40. Furlani E.P., Sahoo Y., Ng K.C., Wortman J.C., Monk T.E. A model for predicting magnetic particle capture in a microfluidic bioseparator. Biomed. Microdevices. 2007;9:451–463. doi: 10.1007/s10544-007-9050-x. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  41. Tarn M.D., Peyman S.A., Robert D., Iles A., Wilhelm C., Pamme N. The importance of particle type selection and temperature control for on-chip free-flow magnetophoresis. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2009;321:4115–4122. doi: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2009.08.016. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  42. Furlani E.P. Permanent Magnet and Electromechanical Devices; Materials, Analysis and Applications. Academic Press; Waltham, MA, USA: 2001. [Google Scholar]
  43. White F.M. Viscous Fluid Flow. McGraw-Hill; New York, NY, USA: 1974. [Google Scholar]
  44. Mathew B., Alazzam A., El-Khasawneh B., Maalouf M., Destgeer G., Sung H.J. Model for tracing the path of microparticles in continuous flow microfluidic devices for 2D focusing via standing acoustic waves. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2015;153:99–107. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2015.08.026. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  45. Furlani E.J., Furlani E.P. A model for predicting magnetic targeting of multifunctional particles in the microvasculature. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2007;312:187–193. doi: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2006.09.026. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  46. Furlani E.P., Ng K.C. Analytical model of magnetic nanoparticle transport and capture in the microvasculature. Phys. Rev. E. 2006;73:061919. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.73.061919. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  47. Eibl R., Eibl D., Pörtner R., Catapano G., Czermak P. Cell and Tissue Reaction Engineering. Springer; Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: 2009. [Google Scholar]
  48. Pamme N., Eijkel J.C.T., Manz A. On-chip free-flow magnetophoresis: Separation and detection of mixtures of magnetic particles in continuous flow. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2006;307:237–244. doi: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2006.04.008. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  49. Alorabi A.Q., Tarn M.D., Gómez-Pastora J., Bringas E., Ortiz I., Paunov V.N., Pamme N. On-chip polyelectrolyte coating onto magnetic droplets-Towards continuous flow assembly of drug delivery capsules. Lab Chip. 2017;17:3785–3795. doi: 10.1039/C7LC00918F. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  50. Zhang H., Guo H., Chen Z., Zhang G., Li Z. Application of PECVD SiC in glass micromachining. J. Micromech. Microeng. 2007;17:775–780. doi: 10.1088/0960-1317/17/4/014. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  51. Mourzina Y., Steffen A., Offenhäusser A. The evaporated metal masks for chemical glass etching for BioMEMS. Microsyst. Technol. 2005;11:135–140. doi: 10.1007/s00542-004-0430-3. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  52. Mata A., Fleischman A.J., Roy S. Fabrication of multi-layer SU-8 microstructures. J. Micromech. Microeng. 2006;16:276–284. doi: 10.1088/0960-1317/16/2/012. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  53. Su N. 8 2000 Negative Tone Photoresist Formulations 2002–2025. MicroChem Corporation; Newton, MA, USA: 2002. [Google Scholar]
  54. Su N. 8 2000 Negative Tone Photoresist Formulations 2035–2100. MicroChem Corporation; Newton, MA, USA: 2002. [Google Scholar]
  55. Fu C., Hung C., Huang H. A novel and simple fabrication method of embedded SU-8 micro channels by direct UV lithography. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2006;34:330–335. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/34/1/054. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  56. Kazoe Y., Yamashiro I., Mawatari K., Kitamori T. High-pressure acceleration of nanoliter droplets in the gas phase in a microchannel. Micromachines. 2016;7:142. doi: 10.3390/mi7080142. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  57. Sharp K.V., Adrian R.J., Santiago J.G., Molho J.I. Liquid flows in microchannels. In: Gad-el-Hak M., editor. MEMS: Introduction and Fundamentals. CRC Press; Boca Raton, FL, USA: 2006. pp. 10-1–10-46. [Google Scholar]
  58. Oh K.W., Lee K., Ahn B., Furlani E.P. Design of pressure-driven microfluidic networks using electric circuit analogy. Lab Chip. 2012;12:515–545. doi: 10.1039/C2LC20799K. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  59. Bruus H. Theoretical Microfluidics. Oxford University Press; New York, NY, USA: 2008. [Google Scholar]
  60. Beebe D.J., Mensing G.A., Walker G.M. Physics and applications of microfluidics in biology. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2002;4:261–286. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.4.112601.125916. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  61. Yalikun Y., Tanaka Y. Large-scale integration of all-glass valves on a microfluidic device. Micromachines. 2016;7:83. doi: 10.3390/mi7050083. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  62. Van Heeren H., Verhoeven D., Atkins T., Tzannis A., Becker H., Beusink W., Chen P. [(accessed on 9 March 2020)];Design Guideline for Microfluidic Device and Component Interfaces (Part 2) Version 3. Available online: http://www.makefluidics.com/en/design-guideline?id=7.
  63. Scheuble N., Iles A., Wootton R.C.R., Windhab E.J., Fischer P., Elvira K.S. Microfluidic technique for the simultaneous quantification of emulsion instabilities and lipid digestion kinetics. Anal. Chem. 2017;89:9116–9123. doi: 10.1021/acs.analchem.7b01853. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  64. Lynch E.C. Red blood cell damage by shear stress. Biophys. J. 1972;12:257–273. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Paul R., Apel J., Klaus S., Schügner F., Schwindke P., Reul H. Shear stress related blood damage in laminar Couette flow. Artif. Organs. 2003;27:517–529. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1594.2003.07103.x. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  66. Gómez-Pastora J., Karampelas I.H., Xue X., Bringas E., Furlani E.P., Ortiz I. Magnetic bead separation from flowing blood in a two-phase continuous-flow magnetophoretic microdevice: Theoretical analysis through computational fluid dynamics simulation. J. Phys. Chem. C. 2017;121:7466–7477. doi: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b12835. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  67. Lim J., Yeap S.P., Leow C.H., Toh P.Y., Low S.C. Magnetophoresis of iron oxide nanoparticles at low field gradient: The role of shape anisotropy. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2014;421:170–177. doi: 10.1016/j.jcis.2014.01.044. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  68. Culbertson C.T., Sibbitts J., Sellens K., Jia S. Fabrication of Glass Microfluidic Devices. In: Dutta D., editor. Microfluidic Electrophoresis: Methods and Protocols. Humana Press; New York, NY, USA: 2019. pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]