Figure 2. Experimental setup and image analysis.
Figure 3 . Electric field simulation in the microfluidic device . Schematic of the gold electrodes on a SiO2/Si substrate. Distribution of the electric-field gradient on the top, bottom, and at the cross section of the electrodes in the microfluidic device using COMSOL simulation. The unit of the color scale is V2/m3.
Figure 4. Dielectrophoretic response of U87 glioma cells. a)Schematic for the distribution of glioma cells in the microchannel according to applied DEP forces, 3: strong pDEP, 2: pDEP, 1: weak pDEP, 0: no DEP forces. b) Distribution of the U87 glioma cells in the electrode array and the number glioma cells experienced FDEP. c) The number of cells with pDEP behavior when 3 Vpp, and 0 – 10 MHz frequencies were applied.d) Zoomed frequencies: 0, 100 kHz, 200 kHz, 400 kHz, and 500 kHz. The mean values with the standard deviations represent 500 cells.
Figure 5. Distribution of glioma cells in the microchannel according to applied DEP forces. Numbers and positions of glioma cells associated with a) strong pDEP, b) pDEP, c)weak pDEP forces. Ordinary one-way ANOVA Tukey’s multiple comparison test was applied using GraphPad Prism 9. *p ≤ 0.05, **p ≤ 0.01, ***p ≤ 0.001, ****p ≤ 0.0001.
Figure 6. Viability of the U87 glioma cells. a) Viability difference of U87 glioma cells in regular growth medium (DMEM) and in DEP buffer for 30 min. It was not significantly different according to Student’s t-test (p=0.99). b) Percentages of the dead cells (PI positive) in the population of glioma cells (DAPI) before and after the DEP experiment.