Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2110.06719

Microfluidic bioanalytical flow cells for biofilm studies: A review

Mohammad Pousti·MirPouyan Zarabadi·Mehran Abbaszadeh Amirdehi·François Paquet-Mercier·Jesse Greener
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Bacterial biofilms are among the oldest and most prevalent multicellular life forms on Earth and are increasingly relevant in research areas related to industrial fouling, medicine and biotechnology. The main hurdles to obtaining definitive experimental results include time-varying biofilm properties, structural and chemical heterogeneity, and especially their strong sensitivity to environmental cues. Therefore, in addition to judicious choice of measurement tools, a well-designed biofilm study requires strict control over experimental conditions, more so than most chemical studies. Due to excellent control over a host of physiochemical parameters, microfluidic flow cells have become indispensable in microbiological studies. Not surprisingly, the number of lab-on-chip studies focusing on biofilms and other microbiological systems with expanded analytical capabilities has expanded rapidly in the past decade. In this paper, we comprehensively review the current state of microfluidic bioanalytical research applied to bacterial biofilms and offer a perspective on new approaches that are expected to drive continued advances in this field.

Explore related subjects

q-bio.QM

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mohammad Pousti, MirPouyan Zarabadi, Mehran Abbaszadeh Amirdehi, François Paquet-Mercier, Jesse Greener. 2021-10-13. Microfluidic bioanalytical flow cells for biofilm studies: A review. https://doi.org/10.1039/c8an01526k

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Lightning-fast adaptive immune receptor similarity search by symmetric deletion lookup

An individual's adaptive immune receptor (AIR) repertoire records immune history due to the receptors' antigen specificity. Reading this record requires computational approaches for inferring receptor function from sequence, as the diversity of possible receptor-antigen pairs vastly outstrips experimental knowledge. Identification of AIRs with similar sequence and thus putatively similar function is a common performance bottleneck in these approaches. Here, we benchmark the runtime scaling of five algorithmic approaches to radius-based search for Levenshtein neighbors. We show that a symmetric deletion lookup approach, originally proposed for spell-checking, is particularly scalable. We introduce SymScan and XTNeighbor, optimized CPU and GPU software implementing a parallelized variant of the algorithm. For one million input sequences, these tools identify all sequence pairs that differ by one or two edits in seconds, orders of magnitude faster than existing approaches. We demonstrate how symmetric deletion lookup can be integrated as a pre-filtering step in T cell receptor metaclone discovery and B cell receptor lineage identification. Our contribution is poised to greatly accelerate existing analysis pipelines and enable processing of immunosequencing data at scale.

q-bio.QM↗
arXiv2026

Implication of modelling choices on connectivity estimation: A comparative analysis

Landscape connectivity is an important field with important conservation implications. Connectivity modelling is a useful tool to inform and guide landscape planning. However, it involves assumptions and methodological decisions which ultimately impact connectivity outcomes. In order to understand the implications of modelling choices on final connectivity estimations, we compare two landscape characterisation approaches - expert knowledge and species distribution models - and three movements models - least-cost paths, circuit theory and an individual-based movement simulator. The implementation of the models and the construction of the analyses scope highlighted conceptual and methodological differences that made the comparison difficult. Landscape characterisation appears as the principal factor determining connectivity outcomes. Therefore, the confrontation between expert knowledge and species distribution models is critical to leverage points of convergence and complementarity between these two approaches. Conceptual differences between movement models are reported on connectivity map and habitat patch contribution estimations. In the want of data and protocol design specifically to validate connectivity models, approaches that integrate stochastic and behavioural processes, bring a more realistic perspective to connectivity estimation.

q-bio.QM↗
arXiv2026

Triplication: an important component of the modern scientific method

A scientific-study protocol (defined) is designed to deliver results from which inductive inference is allowed. In the nineteenth century, triplication was introduced into the plant sciences and Fisher's p<0.05 rule (1925) incorporated into triple-result protocols designed to counter random/systematic errors which contribute to real-world variability. The aims of the present study were to: (1) classify replication protocols; (2) assess their prevalence in plant-science studies (published during one twenty-first-century year; for defined variable construct); (3) explore triplication rationale. Methods: a plant-sciences protocol-prevalence report was produced; experimental/associational-study proportions analyzed; and real-world-data proxies used to show confidence-interval-width patterns with increasing replicate number. Results: 25% plant-science studies analyzed showed triplication, including 11% triple-result protocols (including greater replicate numbers: 48%;17%, respectively). Theoretical considerations indicated that even if systematic errors predominate, (previously-known) square-root rules sometimes apply, contributing to triplication importance (exemplified by real-world-data proxies). Conclusions: The defined protocols, with minor modifications, should provide the means for assessment of most sciences. Triplication was extensively applied in studies analysed and there are strong methodological reasons why triplication, rather than duplication/quadruplication, is the appropriate standard: triple-result protocols: (a) effectively reduce false positives to acceptable levels; (b) give qualitatively-different information (shape) from duplication; (c) have a large efficiency advantage (concerning confidence-interval widths) over quadruplication. The application of batch replication is not, primarily, a statistical problem and cannot effectively be replaced by simulation.

q-bio.QM↗