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.