Re: NEW SORTER

From: Howard Shapiro (hms@shapirolab.com)
Date: Fri Dec 10 1999 - 08:52:56 EST


>About the Caltech microfluidic sorter (Fu AY et al, Nature Biotechnology 
>17:1109, November, 1999) Keith Bahjat comments:


>And you think your sorts take a long time now!! Imagine if your sample rate
>was determined by capillary action.
>
>I guess for $25K, you can just buy 20 of them and use them all together,
>right?? And where does it save the listmode data?? :-)

Well, yeah, this is closer to NoFlo than to MoFlo, but it wasn't intended 
for high speed sorting.  A major application is DNA fragment sizing, along 
the lines of what has been done at Los Alamos for some years; the 
instrument built by Steve Quake's group at Caltech is a little more 
user-friendly, probably cheaper (the detector in the Los Alamos instruments 
costs about $4,000, and would contribute between $12,000 and $20,000 to the 
selling price according to conventional guidelines).  And it can sort 
molecules.  Or viruses.  Or bacteria.  In a disposable, closed fluidic 
system.  About as fast as a FACSCalibur or Partec sorter, if need be.

In applications to bacteria and cells, the Caltech apparatus has the 
advantage that the flow can be stopped and reversed; you can examine one 
cell repeatedly over time before deciding whether you want to sort 
it.  And, since the system is microscope based, it would be relatively easy 
to combine the fluidics with analytical capability such as is found in 
CompuCyte's Laser Scanning Cytometer to do multiparameter sequential 
analysis (and sorting) of multiple cells in multiple channels.

It's unfortunate that the press release focused on comparing this 
technology with existing cell sorters; it really extends practical 
cytometry in two interesting and important directions, one being analysis 
of smaller stuff, and the second being the combination of strong points of 
static cytometry and flow sorting.

In the interest of full disclosure, I have been a consultant to CompuCyte, 
Cytomation, Mycometrix (which will commercialize the Caltech instrument), 
and even B-D, among others. But everybody probably guessed that.  I don't 
mind giving free advice on the Mailing List, but I do have to make a living.

-Howard



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 11:54:20 EST