AN ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT MICROCHIP-BASED ELECTROPHORESIS TECHNOLOGY
Claude Nguyen
Writer’s comment:
Writing this review paper for English 104E under the direction of Dr.
Sondra Reid, I realized how important it is for writers to possess true
interest in their topic. A passion for the topic, no doubt, fuels the
meticulous attention to detail that is required for technical writing.
Searching for my topic, I wanted to learn about the latest developments
in molecular biology, particularly in the technology behind most
research. I decided on microchip electrophoresis because of its
relation to biochemistry, my field of study. In addition, I was
interested in learning about the strides being taken to improve the
efficiency of current equipment. Microchip electrophoresis promises to
increase productivity while minimizing material use. The significance
of this technology is clear, since long operating times and expensive
biological samples are key factors limiting the science that can be
performed with conventional electrophoresis.
—Claude Nguyen
Instructor’s comment: Facing the review paper
assignment in scientific writing (English 104E), Claude Nguyen chose to
discuss a fascinating group of studies that report advances in
microchip electrophoresis, an emerging field that blends molecular
biology and computer engineering. Not coincidentally, this combination
reflects Claude’s achievements in both fields. In applying his
continuing interest in computer science (his original major at UC
Davis) to problems associated with his biochemistry major, his
excellent review provides an instructive look at how technology is
working to improve procedures for separating and analyzing biological
samples. Such are the ways a committed student of science—particularly,
one who writes clearly—helps the rest of us glimpse some of the amazing
developments taking place in areas of research characterized by radical
change. I, for one, am grateful for the overview and expect that other
readers will be, too.
—Sondra Reid, English Department
Introduction
Microchip-based electrophoresis represents the latest effort toward
cheaper and faster separation assays. Unlike traditional
electrophoresis techniques such as heteroduplex analysis (HDA) and
single-strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP), which typically utilize
slab gels (S. Liu et al., 2000), microchip electrophoresis employs
microfabricated wafers as a separation medium for molecular samples.
Current slab gel techniques possess notable faults, including slow rate
of analysis, high materials cost, and difficulty in finding
heterozygous DNA (Tian, Brody, et al., 2000). Recent strides in
separation technology like capillary electrophoresis (CE) focus on
reducing costs by miniaturizing the procedure. These processes are
fast, have high precision, and reduce the amount of reagent used (Y.
Liu et al., 2000).
Because problems such as capillary wall adsorption plague these
techniques (Y. Liu et al., 2000), however, demand has increased for a
sequencing method that provides high throughput at low cost. Microchip
electrophoresis promises to eliminate some of these flaws. By utilizing
a small conductive medium such as a silica wafer to conduct samples,
the method consumes only minute amounts of sampling material and
reagents. Microdevices also tout high throughput levels and increased
automation (Tian, Brody, et al., 2000). Using short separation channels
and narrow sample bands, microchip electrophoresis can sequence samples
more quickly than traditional techniques (S. Liu et al., 2000).
Although microchip electrophoresis possesses these advantages, its
purported improvements in precision have not been proven (Schmalzing et
al., 2000). Issues such as standardization in chip design and problems
with resolution must also be addressed before the technology can be
widely embraced.
Performance of Microchip-based Electrophoresis
Separation Rate
Microchip electrophoresis separation times are much shorter than those
of traditional techniques. In one experiment, microchip-based SSCP
performed on both wild-type and normal 185delAG, 5382insC, and 6174delT
alleles was completed in less than 120 seconds (Tian, Jaquins-Gerstl,
et al., 2000). This is four times faster than conventional SSCP and 100
times faster than traditional gel electrophoresis. Another project by
Schmalzing et al. (2000) compared microchip electrophoresis to
conventional slab gel separations in detecting mutations in clinical
samples. Results showed that microchip electrophoresis was fifty times
faster than slab gel methods while maintaining a comparable accuracy
level (± 5 base pairs). While the gel method took 64 minutes to resolve
a mutation, the same mutation was detected on microchip in only 68.4
seconds.
Separation Resolution
Although most applications of microchip electrophoresis report equal or
greater sample resolution compared with traditional sequencing, actual
resolution using microdevices may vary. Resolution achieved using
microchip electrophoresis seems to depend on the characteristics of the
solutions used. Rodriguez, Jin, and Li (2000) tested the sequencing of
amino acids using varied concentrations of borate buffer. As they
increased the concentration of borate, the resolution for all samples
tested improved. In addition, samples with higher ionic strengths
produced faster results and higher resolution (Rodriguez, Jin, &
Li, 2000).
In some cases, resolution varied depending on the application where
microchips were used. Tian, Brody, et al. (2000) compared CE-based HDA
with microchip electrophoresis in detecting six heterozygous mutations,
deletions, and insertions. Microchip electrophoresis succeeded in
detecting the mutations, but at a decreased resolution. Conversely,
microchip-based HDA successfully located two homoduplexes, suggesting
that microdevices may have increased detection efficiency with some
mutations. This variation in resolution suggests that microchips may be
better suited to detect certain mutations than others.
Decreased resolution may be traced back to reagent solutions used as
well. Separations must be performed in solutions with high salt
concentrations to achieve high resolution (Tian, Brody, et al., 2000).
High salt concentrations, which are often required in the Polymerase
Chain Reaction (PCR), facilitate sample separation. As a result, the
level of resolution achieved is increased. Salt solutions, however, can
degrade microchip pathways (Tian, Brody, et al., 2000). To ameliorate
the problem, Tian et al. (2000) performed HDA microchip electrophoresis
on samples diluted with deionized water. The ability to detect
mutations in these diluted samples was reduced. In contrast to previous
findings, where salt was shown not to affect the resolution in
comparison to HDA, products used directly from PCR yielded comparable
or better resolutions. These results suggest that channel walls should
be modified to protect them against the adverse effects of salt in the
samples.
Chip Design Considerations
The material composition of the microchip can have a large influence on
the effectiveness of microchip electrophoresis. Currently, scientists
are still experimenting with chips composed of different materials.
Microchips usually consist of channels microfabricated or etched on
fused glass or silica wafers (S. Liu et al., 2000). Recently, chip
design has started to move away from glass or silica substrates,
focusing on polymer substrates instead (Chen & Chen, 2000). Such
polymers are cheaper and easier to manipulate than glass or silica. One
recent study by Chen and Chen (2000) used Plexiglas and a
wire-imprinting method to create a chip. This method decreased the
variability of channel widths both in the same chip (6%) and between
chips (10%). Wire-imprinted chips demonstrated a resolution greater
than or equal to that of traditional microfabricated chips.
Since throughput is directly correlated with the number of separation
channels available on a chip (S. Liu et al., 2000), an effective chip
layout is critical to the success of the separation. Many variations of
microchip design are possible, but the most effective designs
incorporate the same features, including effective use of chip space,
simultaneous perpendicular scanning by the sample detector across all
channels, and uniform injection capability (S. Liu et al., 2000).
Depending on the application, different channel shapes may be required
to produce effective results. One chip design incorporated right-angle
turns in their channels; S. Liu at al. (2000) found that using right
angles in the capillary tubes promoted separation that is ideal for
analysis of DNA fragment size. These same tubes, however, proved less
effective when sequencing separations.
The most evident restriction in layout is the size of the chip itself.
S. Liu et al. (2000) concluded that on average, channel lengths cannot
exceed half of the diameter of the chip. On a 10-cm-diameter chip, they
achieved separation lengths of 3.3 cm. Although channels of such short
length are ideal for restriction fragments, they restrict length of the
readings in sequencing separations. Tian, Brody, et al. (2000)
concluded that resolution increases with the use of longer separation
channels. S. Liu et al. (2000) also found that straight channels should
be used for most applications, since curved channels reduce separation
resolution. They note that channels should be within scanning range of
the detector and should be equal in length from anode to cathode ends
to produce electrical field strengths of equal magnitude in all
channels.
Conclusion
Much work is necessary to standardize the materials and equipment used
in microchip electrophoresis. As shown by the variations in both chip
characteristics and reagent use on resolution, microchips require a
degree of calibration and specialization to match each application.
While recent experiments in microchip electrophoresis have generated
much insight on the variables affecting sample resolution and
effectiveness, further experimentation with chip materials and
conditions seems likely. Results produced thus far have yet to be
integrated into a single consistent, reproducible method.
Yet the benefits of microchip-based electrophoresis cannot be ignored.
Microchip electrophoresis shows great potential over proven slab gel
techniques: it is fast, inexpensive, requires minute amounts of sample,
and promises automation. To harness the potential of the microchip
medium, automated matrix replacement and sample loading should be used
(S. Liu et al., 2000). Sensitive automation and channel processing
equipment must be incorporated to handle the small sample volumes
allowed by microchips. The specifications of such fundamental
components, however, are not standard in all microdevices (Schmalzing
et al., 2000). Before microchip-based electrophoresis can be embraced,
the machinery necessary for sample loading and detection must be
standardized.
Literature Cited
Chen, Y., and Chen, S. 2000. Analysis of DNA fragments by
microchip electrophoresis fabricated on poly(methyl methacrylate)
substrates using a wire-imprinting method. Electrophoresis 21: 165-170.
Liu, S., Ren, H., Gao, Q., Roach, D.J., Loder, R.T., Armstrong, T.M.,
Mao, Q., Blaga, I., Barker, D.L., and Jovanovich, S.B. 2000. Automated
parallel DNA sequencing on multiple channel microchips. PNAS 10: 5369-5374.
Liu, Y., Foote, R.S., Culbertson, C.T., Jacobson, S.C., Ramsey, R.S.,
and Ramsey, J.M. 2000. Electrophoretic Separation of Proteins on
Microchips. J. Microcolumn Separations 12(7): 407-411.
Rodriguez, I., Jin, L.J., and Li, S.F.Y. 2000. High-speed chiral separations on microchip electrophoresis devices. Electrophoresis 21: 211-219.
Schmaizing, D., Belenky, A., Novotny, M.A., Koutny, L., Salas-Solano,
O., El-Difrawy, S., Adourian, A., Matsudaira, P., and Ehrlich, D. 2000.
Microchip electrophoresis: a method for high-speed SNP detection. Nucleic Acids Research 28: 1-6.
Tian, H., Brody, L.C., and Landers, J.P. 2000. Rapid Detection of
Deletion, Insertion, and Substitution Mutations via Heteroduplex
Analysis Using Capillary- and Microchip-Based Electrophoresis. Genome Research 10: 1403-1413.
Tian, H., Jaquins-Gerstl, A., Munro, N., Trucco, M., Brody, L.C., and
Landers, J.P. 2000. Single Strand Conformation Polymorphism Analysis by
Capillary and Microchip Electrophoresis: A Fast, Simple Method for
Detection of Common Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Genomics 63: 25-34.