Abstract
Dissociated primary neuronal cell culture remains an indispensable approach for neurobiology research in order to investigate basic mechanisms underlying diverse neuronal functions, drug screening and pharmacological investigation. Compartmentalization, a widely adopted technique since its emergence in 1970s enables spatial segregation of neuronal segments and detailed investigation that is otherwise limited with traditional culture methods. Although these compartmental chambers (e.g. Campenot chamber) have been proven valuable for the investigation of Peripheral Nervous System (PNS) neurons and to some extent within Central Nervous System (CNS) neurons, their utility has remained limited given the arduous manufacturing process, incompatibility with high-resolution optical imaging and limited throughput. The development in the area of microfabrication and microfluidics has enabled creation of next generation compartmentalized devices that are cheap, easy to manufacture, require reduced sample volumes, enable precise control over the cellular microenvironment both spatially as well as temporally, and permit highthroughput testing. In this review we briefly evaluate the various compartmentalization tools used for neurobiological research, and highlight application of the emerging microfluidic platforms towards in vitro single cell neurobiology.
Keywords: Axon guidance, compartmentalized chambers, micro/nanofluidic platforms, neuron cell culture, neuronal injury, synaptogenesis.
1. INTRODUCTION
The human brain undergoes remarkable self-organization as the morphological changes occur during its development. Understanding the mechanism governing these structural and functional aspects has huge implication from basic biology to treatment of brain disorders. The motive behind advancement of analytical tools and techniques for neurobiology has thus been to facilitate the understanding of the nervous system from molecular scale to systems level. In their natural setting within the complex cytoarchitecture of brain, neurons grow in a densely packed, well-organized, three-dimensional environment supported by signaling factors, proteins, and various neighboring cells. Typically, neurons and their projected extensions spanning over considerable distances are subjected to varying chemical, physical and fluidic microenvironment making in vivo investigation a major challenge and sometimes problematic [1]. Isolated primary neurons are widely used for experimental investigation and have served an important role in the understanding of mechanisms governing diverse neuronal functions such as axon guidance and pathfinding [2-10], synaptogenesis [11-15] and plasticity [16-23]. The traditional neuronal cell culture has also been widely utilized to validate the protein functions [24-30] and to screen chemical libraries for identifying targeted drug molecules that treat neurological disorders [31-34]. In comparison to other cell types, neurons usually have polarized morphology with distinct cellular compartments (axon, dendrites and soma) that can cover a wide range of scales; and they are also very sensitive to environmental cues, temperature, growth conditions and can alter their behavior in response to their microenvironment thus making it difficult to achieve results similar to those obtainable from in vivo experiments [35]. Conventional neuron cultures do not offer the capability to control and manipulate extracellular environment with sufficient spatial and temporal resolution, which is an absolute requirement for investigating some of the underlying mechanisms involved in spinal cord injury, regeneration, as well as in neurodegenerative diseases. Therefore, there is great need for in vitro experimental approaches that can recapitulate the biological complexity in vivo, and tools that will enable precise manipulation, high-throughput investigation, thus pushing the boundaries towards single cell and sub-cellular targeted neuropharmacology.
2. NEURON CULTURE AND COMPARTMENTALIZATION
Neurons are very sensitive to their environmental cues. Temperature, composition of culture media, pH, oxygen concentration can alter their behavior in response to the microenvironment. The initial pioneering work with neuronal culture optimization has demonstrated that neurons retain their morphologies in culture and exhibit density-dependent viability [36, 37]. In a standard culture dish based in vitro culture the dissociated hippocampal neurons adhere to the protein modified surface within a few minutes and over the next 24-48h continue to mature as they achieve their original morphology. The neuronal polarity is established through a series of structural and functional developmental events, early work by Dotti et al. has illustrated the five stages of the neuronal polarization process. During the initial stage the seeded neurons adhere to the substrate and are unpolarized; subsequently at stage 2 the neurite processes start extending. The next stage that lasts for 24h is the period during which the neurons express polarization. Initially it is difficult to distinguish the individual neurites explicitly as axons or dendrites. Eventually during the subsequent stage 4, one of the protoplasmic protrusions from the neuron rapidly outgrows in length and prolongs surpassing the other arising minor processes by approximately 10-15 μm, next the dendrites grow and are observed developing. The final stage lasts for about 7 days, the neurons fully mature with extended axon and developed dendritic tree [38]. In an isotropic environment within a culture plate it is difficult to control the growth of neurons in a spatially and temporally well-controlled manner since establishment of neuronal polarity is spontaneous and the outgrowing features have random orientation.
In mature neurons the soma or neuronal cell bodies are typically in the range of 10-20 microns while the axons can extend several hundreds to thousands of microns. Thus, the organelles, proteins, neurotransmitters have to travel a long distance to reach the nerve terminal and synaptic points. Similarly, the neurotrophic factors, extracellular signals, neurotransmitters received from the target cells or other neurons need to be transported to the soma along the axons. The failure in this axioplasmic transportation, either anterograde or retrograde disrupts neuronal function. Extensive studies focused on Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease have suggested the involvement of axonal transport and degeneration on disease onset as well as progression [39, 40]. From a biological perspective, the exact role of isolated neuronal compartment (either the soma or the axon) in disease progression is still unclear. Along with in vivo studies, in vitro neuronal cultures are being used for these investigations. Yet, there are limited approaches to control growth, orientation and connectivity of neuronal processes within cell culture, and the most widely used technique is compartmentalization. The main advantage of compart-mentalization approach is that it enables spatial segregation of neuronal cellular features, improves visualization and enables detailed investigation that is otherwise limited with traditional culture methods. There are several reviews focusing on the application of microtechnologies for neurobiology, here we focus specifically on the compartmentalization and microfluidic aspects [41-45]. These compartmentalization devices can be generally classified into traditional and emerging microscale devices for the sake of comparison; Fig. 1 depicts the different types of devices that are used with their advantage and limitations.
Fig. (1).

Different methods to achieve compartmentalization in two-dimensional neuronal cultures.
The conventional compartmentalized devices include Campenot chambers, filter-based devices, while microscale devices are either micropatterned or microfluidic. These devices enable manipulation of the neuronal components and enable selective separation, stretching as well as biochemical analysis that is not possible in a standard culture dish. The following sections provide introduction to the different compartmentalized devices with their application, advantages and limitations.
3. NON-MICROFLUIDIC COMPARTMENTALIZED PLATFORM FOR NEURONAL CELL CULTURE
This category includes the traditional plat forms that were developed to enable physical isolation of the neurons and sub-cellular compartmentalization, but not explicitly addressing all the requirements for single cell investigation. An emerging technique that relies on surface modification by protein micropatterning to achieve site-directed cell placement and growth is also presented.
3.1. Campenot Chamber
Campenot chambers, introduced by Campenot in 1977 have been widely used for studying neurite and axon biology [46]. In this work, the chambers were employed to evaluate the survival and growth of sympathetic neurons to distal nerve growth factor. The basic assembly of the device consisted of a modular Teflon piece having three individual chambers sealed with a layer of grease to a collagen coated tissue culture dish and 20 parallel tracks that were spaced 200μm apart (Fig. 2A, 2B). The neurons that were plated in the central chamber of the Teflon piece grew axons along the tracks within two to three days and extended into the adjacent chambers filled with NGF. This simple format Campenot chambers have been used to investigate various neuronal functions such as the transport of signaling factors within the axons, the synthesis of structural protein (-tubulin, and actin [46-50]. These chambers have also been used to isolate the axonal extensions for subsequent molecular analysis using PCR [51], Western blot analysis [52]. A modified version of the Campenot chamber consisting of Teflon ring and glass coverslip forming two compartments was used by Ivins et al. to study (-Amyloid induced degeneration and apoptosis in cultured hippocampal neurons [53]. The unique design of the device makes it easy to perform biochemical analysis or apply stimulants distally or proximally. Some of the limitations associated with these Campenot type chambers are a) Fluid in chambers leaks out because of the sealing with just a layer of grease; b) Device is difficult to assemble and to integrate with advanced live cell imaging microscopy. c) Most of the applications have been towards PNS neurons that have a dependency on neurotrophic agents but the device has not been effective with CNS neurons. More importantly, the structure of Campenot chambers is on the scale of millimeter, which does not match the scale of cellular features and cannot provide accurate spatial control of the individual neurons.
Fig. (2).

Traditional compartmentalized chambers A) Schematic of a Campenot chamber [113] The neurons are placed in the cell body chamber and extend their axons into the distal chamber B) First prototype Campenot chamber [46] C) Schematic of a two chamber compartmentalized microfluidic device [119] D) Commercial Microfluidic Compartmentalized chamber (Xona Microfluidics LLC).
3.2. Membrane Filter Devices
These devices are based on selective isolation of the soma from the neurites as they grow through the filter pores, the assembly can be similar to a Boyden chamber or simply a membrane sandwich placed on glass coverslip. Several studies have illustrated the use of such membrane filter devices for mRNA isolation and quantification of protein synthesis during development with CNS neurons and Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) explants [54-59]. Torre et al. [54] were one of the first to perform detailed study on the use of membrane filters for axon, dendrite isolation from hippocampal neurons. They used a double-surfaced coverslip, the plating surface was porous and permits the passage of neurites but not cell bodies while the second surface, which receives the neurites was attached to the plating surface by a protein matrix. After l0-15 days in vitro, the plating surface was stripped off leaving a nearly pure preparation of living axons and dendrites on the second surface. In another interesting approach, Wu et al. [55] used modified Boyden chamber to isolate axons from DRG explants growing on the filter and mechanical scraping of the neurons after exposure to NGF gradient.
The membrane filter based isolation of neurites is a fast and easy technique but it is impossible to control the orientation of single cells during growth. For assay involving pseudounipolar DRG neurons that only extend axonal processes in culture, this technique can provide a pure preparation of axons, but when used for culturing neurons with full axon-dendrite polarity (e.g. cortical or motor neurons) a mixed preparation of axons and dendrites is obtained. Furthermore, the assembly used for the compartmentalization is not compatible with live cell imaging; besides the process requires mechanical handling making it less efficient as compared to Campenot chamber.
3.3. Micropatterned Devices
This method entails making micropatterns of cell adherent molecules (such as polylysine, laminin etc.) on glass, polymer or plastic substrates either by direct microcontact printing, laser patterning, plasma etching or using microfluidics. Micropatterning has been widely applied for in vitro neuronal investigation studies such as axon guidance [60-65], neuron polarization [66-69], neuronal networks [70-74] and synapse formation [75, 76]. The major advantage of the micropatterning technique is that it is cheap and easy to develop the protocols in house, secondly the defined patterns allow directed placement of the neurons. Most of the proteins, antibodies retain their biological activity during the stamping or contact printing process. Fig. 3 illustrates two such techniques for generating micropatterns, [62] and illustrative examples demonstrating the capability to generate protein gradient patterns for axonal guidance studies. One of the limitations related to this technique is that it does not allow selective isolation of axons and dendrites, also the cell bodies migrate from the pattern if the adjoining area is untreated, furthermore there is no fluidic isolation between the neurites so it is difficult to investigate axonal transportation or selective influence of neurotrophic factors. In a recent study, Scott et al. [69] were able to eliminate some of the above mentioned drawbacks and constrain motility of the soma while causing the axons to grow directionally from the polarized neurons on a poly-D-lysine ratchet pattern, with long chain acrylate-based PEG monolayers preventing non-specific protein adhesion.
Fig. (3).

Microcontact printing technique and application towards axon guidance [adapted and modified from 62]. A) Two different approaches to print protein patterns (red) onto glass coverslip (gray) using either a silicon master (black) or a PDMS elastomer stamp (blue). B) A silicon master with progressively spaced dots providing a graded pattern. C) Scanning electron microscopy image showing dots etched into a silicon master (~650 nm deep). D, E) Fluorescence microscopy image showing contact printed protein patterns displaying gradient, EephrinA5 (green), laminin (red). In E, laminin parallel stripes. F, G) Neuronal growth cones navigating along the protein gradient patterns, ephrinA5 (green), phalloidin-stained axonal actin (red). Scale bars: b, c, d 100 µm; e, 5 µm; f, g, 15 µm.
4. MICROFLUIDIC COMPARTMENTALIZED DEVICES
Microfluidics is the science and technology of manipulating nanoliter volume of fluid in microscale structures [77]. Over the past two decades, the development in the microfluidic technology has enabled the creation of more advanced platforms for neurobiology [1, 78-81]. Microfluidic devices were initially developed with the aim to miniaturize chemical and bimolecular analysis and achieve enhanced sensitivity, speed as well as resolution over conventional methods [82], and have been increasingly utilized for a wide range of applications, including biological assays [79, 83, 84], chemical synthesis [80], single-cell analysis [85-87] and protein, cell, tissue engineering [88-90]. The rapid expansion of microfluidic technology in biomedical research was driven by its exceptional ability to process small sample volumes and to create a well-controlled reaction microenvironment for precise spatial and temporal manipulations of biological events [81, 91]. Briefly, the prime advantages of microfluidics for neurobiology [92] can be summarized as follows: a) High experimental reproducibility given the ease of device fabrication, assembly, and control over substrate surface chemistry; b) Fluidic flow control not only enables density-controlled neuronal seeding and passaging, but also permits precise isolation of the neurites without damage to the somata. The placement of service microchannels allows localized treatment of specific sub-cellular compartments with neurotrophic factors, small molecules, drugs, or nanoparticles; The treatment regime can be performed either in a continuous or pulsatile manner, at desired concentration; c) The small size of the microchambers allows scaling up the number of compartments that can be included on a single chip enabling high-throughput investigation, at a relatively lower cost than plate based assays. The devices are well suited for long-term culture. d) The microfluidic devices are compatibile with microscopy set-up and enable investigation of cellular dynamics with single cell resolution. While microfluidics can enable good control over cell culture certain aspects need to be addressed for achieving good results. The shear stress generated within confined microchannels during high-pressure fluid flow can stress the cells, and cause, damage or retraction of the neuritic processes and detachment [93, 94]. Usually operating at low flow rates using programmed syringe pumps or slow dispensing with micropipettes can avoid these issues; Other issues that need to be considered by new users include material selection, poly (dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS) a widely used material is transparent, and has high gas permeability, also its surface chemistry can be modified to control liquid surface-tension within the channels [95-97].
Typically, the devices are fabricated using a technique called soft-lithography, a modified fabrication strategy borrowed from the semiconductor industry now employed for making microfluidic devices [98]. A standard fabrication workflow for making a microfluidic device involves three steps (Fig. 4): a) Design and fabrication of template, a designated pattern is fabricated either by photolithography using photoresist material such as SU-8 on a silicon wafer (or micromachined on a metal plate). b) Pattern transfer, the patterned silicon wafer is then used as a template to fabricate devices in polymeric material such as PDMS using a simple process called replica molding. c) Assembly and culture, finally the microfluidic device can be assembled with ports and modified to be used for cell culture and subsequent biological assays. This cheap and easy to implement fabrication route can enable even a standard biological laboratory to make their own devices in house, with limited engineering facility and microfabrication knowledge.
Fig. (4).

Soft-lithography process for fabricating compartmentalized microfluidic devices (Modified from [119]). A, C) layer of photoresist, SU-8, is deposited on top of a Si wafer, a photomask is then used to exposure specific patterns. B, D) The master-mold with the micropatterns is developed. E) Master with raised microstructures features. PDMS is poured over the master and cured. F) The device is peeled, washed, and then sealed over a clean glass coverslip.
A variety of materials have been used for microfluidic cell culture including silicon, glass, quartz, polystyrene and poly (dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS). Silicon and glass substrates can be functionalized to make them biocompatible for neuron culture, also with the added advantage being that these substrates can be integrated with additional features such as microelectrodes for live cell recording. PDMS is widely used for neurobiology application given its advantages of biocompatibility, thermal stability, optical transparency, elasticity, ease of fabrication and low cost [84, 92, 95-97, 99].
4.1. Application of Microfluidics and Compartmentalized Devices towards In vitro Disease Models
The application of microfluidic devices enables us to overcome most of the limitations in traditional compartmentalized devices. The integrated polymeric microfluidic device is easy to assemble and does not need any hydrophobic seal (such as grease in Campenot chamber). The devices have been used for both PNS and CNS derived neurons with good success. The flexibility with fabrication enables both open-channel and closed-channel devices that allow multiplexed chemical stimulation capability or integration of external recording probes. The standard feature of most compartmentalized microfluidic devices is parallel multi-groove topography, the ends of these groove channels open into a larger channel that serves either to seed the neurons or stimulate the growth of axons. Jeon’s group was the first to demonstrate the microfabricated compartmentalized device for neuronal cell culture [100]. Their two-compartment device was fabricated using soft lithography technique, the bottom of a 150 μm wide barrier that isolated the chambers had 120 micron-size grooves (10 μm wide, 3 μm high, and 150 μm in length). The individual grooves were uniformly spaced 50 μm apart to prevent any structural collapsing on assembly. The embryonic neurons were plated in the growth compartment, within 4 days neurites were seen extending through the grooves and into the adjacent compartment. These micron sized grooves counteracted diffusion given the high resistance created by the hydrostatic pressure difference between the two compartments. An example of such a device used for another application by the same group is shown in Fig. 2C, also a commercial version of the device now available from Xona Microfluidics LLC. is shown in Fig. 2D.
There have been a few variations to the original two chamber microfluidic compartmentalized device design, a modified three chamber design [101, 102]; devices that enable electrode placement [103, 104]; circular layout [105-107]. Taylor et al. [102] published a three compartment microfluidic local perfusion (μLP) chamber that was able to fluidically isolate neuronal populations and promote neurite outgrowth through more than 100 parallel microgrooves. They could independently manipulate the two populations at the same time (Fig. 5). For temporal control in these experiments, Taylor et al. used a 3-inlet perfusion channel. The addition of a microperfusion channel orthogonally to the microgrooves allowed addition of various drugs and neurotransmitters to the dendrites and axons in spatially and temporally controlled manner. Using this device they showed that localized treatment of the dendrites with glutamate lead to increased calcium locally as well as in the somatic region. They also investigated the effect of pulsed glutamate stimulation on the dendrites, and found an increased pCREB within the somata as compared to continuous stimulation. Local perfusion of DHPG a metabotropic receptor (mGluR1) agonist to the isolated synaptic regions caused an increase in Arc transcription within the nucleus and Arc mRNA within the treated dendrites. This works provides a seminal example of the growing influence of compartmentalized microfluidic devices to locally manipulate single neurons, and sub-cellular targeting to study the signaling pathways.
Fig. (5).

Example of a three chamber compartmentalized microfluidic device that enables manipulation of synapses [102]. A) Schematic of an integrated local perfusion chamber and channel (yellow) The enlarged image on the right shows the direction of fluid flow within the perfusion channel and the microgrooves. B) A merged fluorescence and DIC image of the device showing the perfusion of the dye Alexa Fluor 488. Scale bar = 50 µm. C) Z axis profile of the dye within the channel during the perfusion and after wash out, taken along the line showing in B) Scale bar = 30 µm. D) A fluorescent image of GFP-labeled neuron extending an axon from the seeding chamber through the microgrooves into the perfusion channel. Scale bar = 50 µm. E) Merged images (DIC, GFP) clearly showing the location of the extended axon through the microgrooves into the perfusion channel.
While compartmentalization enables efficient segregation of the cellular parts, precise placement of the cells within the device has been challenging. Dinh et al. [108] developed a compartmentalized neuron arraying device that enabled single neuron patterning with precision and addresses this issue. The device design enabled developing liquid meniscus at the micropillars and selective protein patterning, thus restricting the neuronal culture only to the arraying region and outgrowth channels. SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cell line or dopaminergic Lund human mesencephalic (LUHMES) neuronal precursors were seeded by the differential flow trapping. The patterning efficiency of this device was greater than 75% and almost 85% of the outgrowth channels were occupied by the extending neurites.
Such microfluidic design strategies for compart-mentalization and cell placement are essential to conduct high-throughput single neuron level experimentation. In the following section we present various in vitro neurobiology assays that have been possible using microfluidic compart-mentalized devices. As we focus on the single-cell investigation, the organotypic slice culture [109] and whole organism screening on microfluidic chips [110, 111] that can be classified as compartmentalized devices have not been included in this review.
4.1.1. Axon Guidance
In its natural microenvironment an axon from a polarized neuron navigates a complex landscape as it grows towards its target, based on guidance cues received by its growth cone. These cues can be short-range or long-range, chemo-attractive of repulsive and may involve guidance molecules, morphogens, growth factors, and cell adhesion proteins [112, 113]. These cues are received by the growth cones found at the tips of growing axons; these are converted into amplified internal signals that lead to asymmetric physiological changes and axonal extension. In a standard culture dish based assay it is difficult to mimic the in vivo gradient microenvironment that is essential to study axonal migration and turning behavior. Microfluidic devices allow control of fluidic interfaces and generating molecular gradients in a systematic and repeatable manner, thus making it possible to create axonal guidance in a controlled microenvironment [64, 114, 115]. A hybrid system involving microfabricated Campenot chamber combined with micropatterned surface was developed by Shi et al. [64] to investigate the effect of fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR), as well as adhesion protein N-cadherin signaling on axon guidance and growth. The rostral cervical motor neurons that were derived from embryonic stem cells and placed in one chamber extended their axons through the microchannel barrier into the second chamber patterned with N-cadherin on laminin. Their work indicated that the local crosstalk between N-cadherin and FGFR stimulated axonal outgrowth, but did not influence the axon guidance along the N-cadherin.
While most of the studies on growth cone have focused on promoting axon growth by directly manipulating the growth cone under stimulant gradient, Hur et al. [114] used a two-compartment microfluidic chamber to study the effect of non-muscle myosin II (NMII) inhibition on axonal growth. They concluded that pharmacological inhibition using blebbistatin or knockdown of NMII gene markedly accelerates axon growth over permissive as well as non-permissive substrates, which include inhibitors such as chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans and myelin-associated inhibitors. The local blockade of NMII activity on the axonal side of the device was sufficient to trigger growth cones to grow across the substrates.
Manipulating the growth cones and obtaining quantitative insight is arduous using standard techniques or within traditional in vitro culture. The examples presented above provide a good overview of integrating microfluidic compartmentalization for systematic study of axonal guidance and local growth cone modulation.
4.1.2. Neurite Transportation, Neurodegenerative Diseases
The prime attribute of neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s has been defect in axonal transportation and/or synaptic deficits due to aggregation of extracellular amyloid plaque, or intracellular neurofibrillary tangles or Lewy bodies [116-118]. The use of traditional culture dish is not suitable for studying these mechanisms given the random orientation of the axons, overlapping synapse formation and difficulty in recovering the axonal material for analysis. Compartmentalized microfluidic devices enable localization of individual neuron with spatial segregation of the soma and growing axons. With limited background noise from other neurons and powerful imaging system it has been possible to study axonal trafficking. Modifying the original two channel compartment design initially developed by Jeon group [119] other groups have demonstrated single-molecule imaging of retrograde axonal transport of NGF [120] and dendrite-to-nucleus signaling of BDNF [121, 122]. In structural biology much of the current understanding about the microtubule assembly in axons and transportation of endosomes is based on biochemical assays and electron microscopy imaging, but this does not recapitulate the real situation in live neurons. Mudrakola et al. [123] utilized the two compartment microfluidic platform in combination with photosensitive quantum dot imaging probes and pseudo total internal reflection fluorescence imaging system to track endosome transportation and dynamic path switching along microtubules. Furthermore, such microfluidic compartmentalized devices have also been used to investigate the defects in axonal transportation caused by the two pathophysiological molecules (-amyloid peptide (A() and Tau protein [124-126].
4.1.3. Neural Injury
CNS and PNS injury can lead to irreversible damage and permanent loss of function, regeneration is difficult at axonal level due to growth inhibitory molecules such as chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans (CSPGs) [127] and myelin-associated inhibitors [128, 129]. Animal experiments and in vivo models of injury provide limited information at neuronal level. The present single cell axotomy technique requires micromanipulators and micron sized glass tips. The procedure is slow, and also increases possibility of contamination, tip breaking and accidental neuronal death.. The ability to spatially segregate axons on microfluidic devices makes it possible to investigate in vitro traumatic axonal injury and study the biochemical changes, gene expression profile and phenotypic changes. Two microfluidic models have been emerged that can cause chemical injury [106, 119, 130, 131] as well as physical injury [132, 133] to the growing neurons.
Taylor et al. [119] utilized their previously published two chamber compartmentalized microfluidic device [100] for studying CNS axon injury and regeneration. Dissociated CNS neuron cells were loaded in the culture platform, and after 4 days the axons extended through the microchannels into the axonal compartment, without dendrites. Vacuum aspiration was employed to axonal channel for 5 seconds to perform axotomy. Furthermore, RNA expression change in FBJ murine osteosarcoma viral oncogene homolog (Fos or c-fos) an immediate early gene, was determined. The vacuum axotomy procedure resulted in an increase in the expression of RNA by about 200% within 15 minutes, and 320% within 2h after the lesion. The microfluidic device was further used to screen candidate molecules for axonal regeneration. A combination of neurotrophin-3 and brain-derived neurotrophic factor was applied for 5 days to locally treated the lesioned axons. The isolated axons treated with neurotrophin showed pronounced increase in axonal branching and growth as compared with the control group. In another study Vahidi et al. [134] demonstrated a simple pinch valve into the MIMIC system combined with a strip assay incorporated into the device to act as surface-bound inhibitors mimicking spinal cord injury. This platform was successfully applied for drug screening; Chondroitinase ABC was applied to the axons that could then overcome the aggre can inhibitory effects.
In another study, Hosmane et al. [132] developed a valve based microcompression platform for inducing injury to micron-scale segments of the individual CNS axons. They tested the effect of acute compression (short 5 s) under different compressive loads (0–250 kPa) and monitored the axons for 12 hours after injury. Under mild compression (< 55 kPa) there was continued growth in 73% of the axons, and slight degeneration. At moderate (55–95 kPa) and severe (> 95 kPa) levels of injury, the number of growing axons dramatically reduced to 8% and below 5% respectively. They also observed that the axons were able to regrow faster and extend 40% more than the uninjured axons even in the absence of exogenous stimulating factors.
4.1.4. High-throughput Compartmentalized Platforms
One of the emerging areas for microfluidic devices is high-throughput screening that allows studying basic biological mechanisms at a larger scale, with reduced cost and time, making it viable for drug development applications. The state-of-art microfluidic devices employ multiple sensors, valves and multiphase flows for achieving high-throughput, and are more feasible for screening large chemical libraries. Such approach is also needed for single cell neuro-pharmacological studies. In one of the first demonstrations, Shi et al. [135] developed a compartmentalized microfluidic platform that enabled screening small molecule library and identify compounds that enhance synaptogenesis (Fig. 7). Synaptic function is affected in many brain diseases, the present assays make it difficult to automate and quantify the synaptic development, and technologies that can enable performing synapse assays in a high-throughput manner can facilitate rapid identification of drug leads. The synapse microarray platform consists of a two main compartment device connected via several parallel microgrooves (10 μm wide and 3 μm high) that effectively isolate the axons from neuronal somata. Dissociated neurons that are plated and cultured in compartment 1 (Fig. 7A) extend their axons through the microgrooves into the compartment 2 (Fig. 7B) that is covered by a thin (80 μm) PDMS membrane held 3 μm above the substrate. The space underlying the membrane allow axonal growth, membrane also contains an array of through-holes or microwells that hold the neuroligin-1 (NLG1) expressing HEK293 cells. The platform design enabled synapse formation in a regular array format, by precisely controlling the position of NLG1expressing cells and providing space for the neurites to grow freely around them. This technique reported a ten-fold increase in the sensitivity as compared to the traditional assays, while decreasing the time required for capturing synaptogenic events by an order of magnitude. Using this device the researchers screened a small chemical library and identified novel histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors that promote synapse formation through NLG1.
Fig. (7).

Schematic of synapse microarray technology and culture results [135]. A) Neuronal cells are loaded and cultured in compartment 1 (cmpt 1). B) Isolated neurites outgrow through the microchannels and extend to the synapse compartment 2 (cmpt2). C) NLG1 expressing HEK293 cells are seeded into the microwell through holes. D) Representative fluorescence image of βIII-tubulin stained neurites in a traditional neuron culture. E) Distribution of total neurite length (normalized to mean) measured within randomly chosen 30 µm diameter regions in a traditional culture (n = 247). F) Fluorescence image of βIII-tubulin stained neurites within the synapse microarray. The microwells are circled in red, scale bar, 100 µm. G) Distribution of total neurite length (normalized to mean) as measured in the microwells (n = 270). H) Image showing random HEK293 cell spreading in traditional cultures (staining for HA–nLG1). I) Histogram of HEK293 cell area coverage in traditional cultures (n = 222). J) HEK293 cells exhibit well-defined morphologies in the synapse microarray (staining for HA–nLG1), scale bar, 100 µm. K) Histogram of HEK293 cell area coverage in the synapse microarray format (n = 286).
Microfluidics chamber combined with other micro-structures such as microwells that compartmentalize individual neurons can be aptly used for high-throughput single-cell level screening of compounds. Folch et al. [136] developed a microfluidic device (Fig. 8) that allowed screening over 20,000 single cells at the same time. The microfluidic device was used to load thousands of dissociated single olfactory sensory neurons (OSN) within a microwell array, and provide stimulation, calcium responses from all the trapped neuronal cells were recorded simultaneously. Importantly, this microfluidic system can also be used for both the detection of the OSN populations that are intermittently responsive as well as broadly responsive to various odorants that have unrelated structure.
Fig. (8).

Microfluidic device integrated microwell based platform for screening Olfactory sensory neuron (OSN) response [136]. A) Schematic showing the cell loading procedure. OSNs are gently flown into the assembled device (top). Fluid flow is stopped to allow the cells to settle under gravity into the microwells (middle). The non-adhered cells are washed off (bottom). B) A fully assembled device with microwells on the bottom layer. The device has several inlets (numbered) and one outlet. C) Close-up of the microwells with OSNs trapped. Inset showing a single OSN within a microwell. Scale bar, 20 µm.
CONCLUSION
The ability to control the microenvironment and direct the growth of neurons in a spatial and temporal manner makes microfluidic compartmentalized devices a versatile tool for neurobiological research. As reviewed here, the application of these devices has enabled understanding the basic mechanism involved in axonal growth, transportation, synaptogenesis and regeneration; this level of detailed investigation was not possible previously using the standard in vitro methods. Many outstanding questions in neurobiology still remain unaddressed. The versatility offered by microfluidics combined with capability to compartmentalize single neurons makes it ideal to be paired with super-resolution imaging techniques (PALM, STORM). Such investigations can provide novel information at sub-cellular scale, shedding new light on transportation, transmission defects responsible for degenerative diseases, and in neuropharmacological research. Additionally, we envision that these devices will be combined with techniques such as RNAi, optogenetics, further broadening their impact on neuropharmacological research.
Fig. (6).

Compartmentalized microfluidic device for rapid and precise neuronal arraying [108]. A, B) Scanning Electron Microscope images of the compartmentalized neuron co-culture array showing trapping sites and meniscus-pinning micropillars. C, D) Bright-field images showing trapped neuronal SH-SY5Y cells and LUHMES cells, taken 4 h after arraying. E, F) SH-SY5Y co-cultures within the 2-compartment and 3-compartment device, β(III)-tubulin immunostaining performed after 5 days.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work was support by National Natural Science Foundation of China (81201164), Early Career Scheme from RGC Hong Kong (ECS125012), General Research Fund for RGC Hong Kong (GRF11211314, GRF11218015), Innovation and Technology Commission of Hong Kong (ITS/376/13) and grants from City University of Hong Kong (ARG9667120).
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors confirm that this article content has no conflict of interest.
REFERENCES
- 1.Park J.W., Vahidi B., Taylor A.M., Rhee S.W., Jeon N.L. Microfluidic culture platform for neuroscience research. Nat. Protoc. 2006;1(4):2128–2136. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2006.316. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Tessier-Lavigne M., Goodman C.S. The molecular biology of axon guidance. Science. 1996;274(5290):1123–1133. doi: 10.1126/science.274.5290.1123. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Nédelec S., Peljto M., Shi P., Amoroso M.W., Kam L.C., Wichterle H. Concentration-dependent requirement for local protein synthesis in motor neuron subtype-specific response to axon guidance cues. J. Neurosci. 2012;32(4):1496–1506. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4176-11.2012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Nishikimi M., Oishi K., Nakajima K. Axon guidance mechanisms for establishment of callosal connections. Neural. Plast. 2013;2013:149060. doi: 10.1155/2013/149060. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Deck M., Lokmane L., Chauvet S., Mailhes C., Keita M., Niquille M., Yoshida M., Yoshida Y., Lebrand C., Mann F., Grove E.A., Garel S. Pathfinding of corticothalamic axons relies on a rendezvous with thalamic projections. Neuron. 2013;77(3):472–484. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.11.031. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Plazas P.V., Nicol X., Spitzer N.C. Activity-dependent competition regulates motor neuron axon pathfinding via PlexinA3. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2013;110(4):1524–1529. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1213048110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Leung L.C., Urbančič V., Baudet M.L., Dwivedy A., Bayley T.G., Lee A.C., Harris W.A., Holt C.E. Coupling of NF-protocadherin signaling to axon guidance by cue-induced translation. Nat. Neurosci. 2013;16(2):166–173. doi: 10.1038/nn.3290. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Wright K.M., Lyon K.A., Leung H., Leahy D.J., Ma L., Ginty D.D. Dystroglycan organizes axon guidance cue localization and axonal pathfinding. Neuron. 2012;76(5):931–944. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.10.009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Duman-Scheel M. Deleted in Colorectal Cancer (DCC) pathfinding: axon guidance gene finally turned tumor suppressor. Curr. Drug Targets. 2012;13(11):1445–1453. doi: 10.2174/138945012803530215. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Huettl R.E., Haehl T., Huber A.B. Fasciculation and guidance of spinal motor axons in the absence of FGFR2 signaling. PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e41095. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0041095. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.McAllister A.K. Dynamic aspects of CNS synapse formation. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2007;30:425–450. doi: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.29.051605.112830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Ko J., Fuccillo M.V., Malenka R.C., Südhof T.C. LRRTM2 functions as a neurexin ligand in promoting excitatory synapse formation. Neuron. 2009;64(6):791–798. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2009.12.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Siddiqui T.J., Pancaroglu R., Kang Y., Rooyakkers A., Craig A.M. LRRTMs and neuroligins bind neurexins with a differential code to cooperate in glutamate synapse development. J. Neurosci. 2010;30(22):7495–7506. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0470-10.2010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Bennett S.A., Valenzuela N., Xu H., Franko B., Fai S., Figeys D. Using neurolipidomics to identify phospholipid mediators of synaptic (dys)function in Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Physiol. 2013;4:168. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2013.00168. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Carasatorre M., Ramirez-Amaya V., Diaz C.S. Structural synaptic plasticity in the hippocampus induced by spatial experience and its implications in information processing. Neurologia. 2013 doi: 10.1016/j.nrl.2012.12.005. pii: S0213-4853(12)00320-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Martin S.J., Grimwood P.D., Morris R.G. Synaptic plasticity and memory: an evaluation of the hypothesis. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2000;23:649–711. doi: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.23.1.649. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Hashimoto T., Yamada M., Iwai T., Saitoh A., Hashimoto E., Ukai W., Saito T., Yamada M. Plasticity-related gene 1 is important for survival of neurons derived from rat neural stem cells. J. Neurosci. Res. 2013;91(11):1402–1407. doi: 10.1002/jnr.23269. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Udupa K., Chen R. Motor cortical plasticity in Parkinson’s disease. Front. Neurol. 2013;4:128. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2013.00128. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Barth A.L., Kuhlman S.J. The many layers of specification and plasticity in the neocortex. Neuron. 2013;79(5):829–831. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.08.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Boulland J.L. A neonatal mouse spinal cord injury model for assessing post-injury adaptive plasticity and human stem cell integration. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e71701. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071701. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Shiga S. Photoperiodic plasticity in circadian clock neurons in insects. Front. Physiol. 2013;4:69. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2013.00069. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Lignani G., Ferrea E., Difato F., Amarù J., Ferroni E., Lugarà E., Espinoza S., Gainetdinov R.R., Baldelli P., Benfenati F. Long-term optical stimulation of channelrhodopsin-expressing neurons to study network plasticity. Front. Mol. Neurosci. 2013;6:22. doi: 10.3389/fnmol.2013.00022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Judas M., Sedmak G., Kostovic I. The significance of the subplate for evolution and developmental plasticity of the human brain. Front Hum. Neurosci. 2013;7:423. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00423. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Zhang H.L., Pan F., Hong D., Shenoy S.M., Singer R.H., Bassell G.J. Active transport of the survival motor neuron protein and the role of exon-7 in cytoplasmic localization. J. Neurosci. 2003;23(16):6627–6637. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.23-16-06627.2003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Lapthanasupkul P. Ring1a/b polycomb proteins regulate the mesenchymal stem cell niche in continuously growing incisors. Dev. Biol. 2012;367(2):53–140. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2012.04.029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Wang W.Y., Pan L., Su S.C., Quinn E.J., Sasaki M., Jimenez J.C., Mackenzie I.R., Huang E.J., Tsai L.H. Interaction of FUS and HDAC1 regulates DNA damage response and repair in neurons. Nat. Neurosci. 2013;16(10):1383–1391. doi: 10.1038/nn.3514. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Ouyang Q. Christianson Syndrome Protein NHE6 Modulates TrkB Endosomal Signaling Required for Neuronal Circuit Development. Neuron. 2013;80(1):97–112. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.07.043. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Bangaru M.L., Weihrauch D., Tang Q.B., Zoga V., Hogan Q., Wu H.E. Sigma-1 receptor expression in sensory neurons and the effect of painful peripheral nerve injury. Mol. Pain. 2013;9:47. doi: 10.1186/1744-8069-9-47. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Prokop A. The intricate relationship between microtubules and their associated motor proteins during axon growth and maintenance. Neural Dev. 2013;8:17. doi: 10.1186/1749-8104-8-17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Meziane H., Fraulob V., Riet F., Krezel W., Selloum M., Geffarth M., Acampora D., Hérault Y., Simeone A., Brand M., Dollé P., Rhinn M. The homeodomain factor Gbx1 is required for locomotion and cell specification in the dorsal spinal cord. PeerJ. 2013;1:e142. doi: 10.7717/peerj.142. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Chang P.K., Verbich D., McKinney R.A. AMPA receptors as drug targets in neurological disease--advantages, caveats, and future outlook. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2012;35(12):1908–1916. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2012.08165.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Letso R.R., Bauer A.J., Lunn M.R., Yang W.S., Stockwell B.R. Small molecule screen reveals regulation of survival motor neuron protein abundance by Ras proteins. ACS Chem. Biol. 2013;8(5):914–922. doi: 10.1021/cb300374h. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Sun Y., Dong Z., Khodabakhsh H., Chatterjee S., Guo S. Zebrafish chemical screening reveals the impairment of dopaminergic neuronal survival by cardiac glycosides. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35645. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0035645. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Schulte J., Sepp K.J., Wu C., Hong P., Littleton J.T. High-content chemical and RNAi screens for suppressors of neurotoxicity in a Huntington’s disease model. PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e23841. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023841. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Walker G.M., Zeringue H.C., Beebe D.J. Microenvironment design considerations for cellular scale studies. Lab Chip. 2004;4(2):91–97. doi: 10.1039/b311214d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Banker G.A., Cowan W.M. Further observations on hippocampal neurons in dispersed cell culture. J. Comp. Neurol. 1979;187(3):469–493. doi: 10.1002/cne.901870302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Brewer G.J., Torricelli J.R., Evege E.K., Price P.J. Optimized survival of hippocampal neurons in B27-supplemented Neurobasal, a new serum-free medium combination. J. Neurosci. Res. 1993;35(5):567–576. doi: 10.1002/jnr.490350513. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Dotti C.G., Sullivan C.A., Banker G.A. The establishment of polarity by hippocampal neurons in culture. J. Neurosci. 1988;8(4):1454–1468. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.08-04-01454.1988. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.De Vos K.J., Grierson A.J., Ackerley S., Miller C.C. Role of axonal transport in neurodegenerative diseases. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2008;31:151–173. doi: 10.1146/annurev.neuro.31.061307.090711. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Cheng H.C., Ulane C.M., Burke R.E. Clinical progression in Parkinson disease and the neurobiology of axons. Ann. Neurol. 2010;67(6):715–725. doi: 10.1002/ana.21995. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Gross P.G. Applications of microfluidics for neuronal studies. J. Neurol. Sci. 2007;252(2):135–143. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2006.11.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Wang J., Ren L., Li L., Liu W., Zhou J., Yu W., Tong D., Chen S. Microfluidics: a new cosset for neurobiology. Lab Chip. 2009;9(5):644–652. doi: 10.1039/B813495B. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Taylor A., Jeon N.L. Microfluidic and Compartmentalized Platforms for Neurobiological Research. Crit. Rev.™. Biomed. Eng. (N.Y.) 2011;39(3):185–200. doi: 10.1615/critrevbiomedeng.v39.i3.20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Park J.W., Kim H.J., Kang M.W., Jeon N.L. Advances in microfluidics-based experimental methods for neuroscience research. Lab Chip. 2013;13(4):509–521. doi: 10.1039/c2lc41081h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Park J.W., Vahidi B., Taylor A.M., Rhee S.W., Jeon N.L. Microfluidic culture platform for neuroscience research. Nat. Protoc. 2006;1(4):2128–2136. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2006.316. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Campenot R.B. Local control of neurite development by nerve growth factor. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 1977;74(10):4516–4519. doi: 10.1073/pnas.74.10.4516. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Campenot R.B., MacInnis B.L. Retrograde transport of neurotrophins: fact and function. J. Neurobiol. 2004;58(2):217–229. doi: 10.1002/neu.10322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Campenot B., Lund K., Senger D.L. Delivery of newly synthesized tubulin to rapidly growing distal axons of sympathetic neurons in compartmented cultures. J. Cell Biol. 1996;135(3):701–709. doi: 10.1083/jcb.135.3.701. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.MacInnis B.L., Campenot R.B. Retrograde support of neuronal survival without retrograde transport of nerve growth factor. Science. 2002;295(5559):1536–1539. doi: 10.1126/science.1064913. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Eng H., Lund K., Campenot R.B. Synthesis of β-tubulin, actin, and other proteins in axons of sympathetic neurons in compartmented cultures. J. Neurosci. 1999;19(1):1–9. doi: 10.1006/nbdi.2000.0359. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.McKerracher L. Spinal cord repair: strategies to promote axon regeneration. Neurobiol. Dis. 2001;8(1):11–18. doi: 10.1006/nbdi.2000.0359. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Senger D.L., Campenot R.B. Rapid retrograde tyrosine phosphorylation of trkA and other proteins in rat sympathetic neurons in compartmented cultures. J. Cell Biol. 1997;138(2):411–421. doi: 10.1083/jcb.138.2.411. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Ivins K.J., Bui E.T., Cotman C.W. β-amyloid induces local neurite degeneration in cultured hippocampal neurons: evidence for neuritic apoptosis. Neurobiol. Dis. 1998;5(5):365–378. doi: 10.1006/nbdi.1998.0228. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Torre E.R., Steward O. Demonstration of local protein synthesis within dendrites using a new cell culture system that permits the isolation of living axons and dendrites from their cell bodies. J. Neurosci. 1992;12(3):762–772. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.12-03-00762.1992. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Wu K.Y., Hengst U., Cox L.J., Macosko E.Z., Jeromin A., Urquhart E.R., Jaffrey S.R. Local translation of RhoA regulates growth cone collapse. Nature. 2005;436(7053):1020–1024. doi: 10.1038/nature03885. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Poon M.M., Choi S.H., Jamieson C.A., Geschwind D.H., Martin K.C. Identification of process-localized mRNAs from cultured rodent hippocampal neurons. J. Neurosci. 2006;26(51):13390–13399. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3432-06.2006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Willis D.E., Twiss J.L. RNA Detection and Visualization. Springer; 2011. Profiling axonal mRNA transport. pp. 335–352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Willis D.E., van Niekerk E.A., Sasaki Y., Mesngon M., Merianda T.T., Williams G.G., Kendall M., Smith D.S., Bassell G.J., Twiss J.L. Extracellular stimuli specifically regulate localized levels of individual neuronal mRNAs. J. Cell Biol. 2007;178(6):965–980. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200703209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Willis D., Li K.W., Zheng J.Q., Chang J.H., Smit A.B., Kelly T., Merianda T.T., Sylvester J., van Minnen J., Twiss J.L. Differential transport and local translation of cytoskeletal, injury-response, and neurodegeneration protein mRNAs in axons. J. Neurosci. 2005;25(4):778–791. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4235-04.2005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Clark P., Britland S., Connolly P. Growth cone guidance and neuron morphology on micropatterned laminin surfaces. J. Cell Sci. 1993;105(Pt 1):203–212. doi: 10.1242/jcs.105.1.203. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Kam L., Shain W., Turner J.N., Bizios R. Axonal outgrowth of hippocampal neurons on micro-scale networks of polylysine-conjugated laminin. Biomaterials. 2001;22(10):1049–1054. doi: 10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00352-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.von Philipsborn A.C., Lang S., Bernard A., Loeschinger J., David C., Lehnert D., Bastmeyer M., Bonhoeffer F. Microcontact printing of axon guidance molecules for generation of graded patterns. Nat. Protoc. 2006;1(3):1322–1328. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2006.251. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Shi P., Shen K., Kam L.C. Local presentation of L1 and N-cadherin in multicomponent, microscale patterns differentially direct neuron function in vitro. Dev. Neurobiol. 2007;67(13):1765–1776. doi: 10.1002/dneu.20553. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Shi P., Nedelec S., Wichterle H., Kam L.C. Combined microfluidics/protein patterning platform for pharmacological interrogation of axon pathfinding. Lab Chip. 2010;10(8):1005–1010. doi: 10.1039/b922143c. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Fricke R., Zentis P.D., Rajappa L.T., Hofmann B., Banzet M., Offenhäusser A., Meffert S.H. Axon guidance of rat cortical neurons by microcontact printed gradients. Biomaterials. 2011;32(8):2070–2076. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.11.036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Gomez N., Lu Y., Chen S., Schmidt C.E. Immobilized nerve growth factor and microtopography have distinct effects on polarization versus axon elongation in hippocampal cells in culture. Biomaterials. 2007;28(2):271–284. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.07.043. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Mai J., Fok L., Gao H., Zhang X., Poo M.M. Axon initiation and growth cone turning on bound protein gradients. J. Neurosci. 2009;29(23):7450–7458. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1121-09.2009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Shelly M. Semaphorin3A regulates neuronal polarization by suppressing axon formation and promoting dendrite growth. Neuron. 2011;71(3):433–446. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.06.041. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Scott M.A., Wissner-Gross Z.D., Yanik M.F. Ultra-rapid laser protein micropatterning: screening for directed polarization of single neurons. Lab Chip. 2012;12(12):2265–2276. doi: 10.1039/c2lc21105j. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Sorribas H., Padeste C., Tiefenauer L. Photolithographic generation of protein micropatterns for neuron culture applications. Biomaterials. 2002;23(3):893–900. doi: 10.1016/S0142-9612(01)00199-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Vogt A.K., Lauer L., Knoll W., Offenhäusser A. Micropatterned substrates for the growth of functional neuronal networks of defined geometry. Biotechnol. Prog. 2003;19(5):1562–1568. doi: 10.1021/bp034016f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Feinerman O., Rotem A., Moses E. Reliable neuronal logic devices from patterned hippocampal cultures. Nat. Phys. 2008;4(12):967–973. doi: 10.1038/nphys1099. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Frimat J.P., Sisnaiske J., Subbiah S., Menne H., Godoy P., Lampen P., Leist M., Franzke J., Hengstler J.G., van Thriel C., West J. The network formation assay: a spatially standardized neurite outgrowth analytical display for neurotoxicity screening. Lab Chip. 2010;10(6):701–709. doi: 10.1039/b922193j. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Hardelauf H., Sisnaiske J., Taghipour-Anvari A.A., Jacob P., Drabiniok E., Marggraf U., Frimat J.P., Hengstler J.G., Neyer A., van Thriel C., West J. High fidelity neuronal networks formed by plasma masking with a bilayer membrane: analysis of neurodegenerative and neuroprotective processes. Lab Chip. 2011;11(16):2763–2771. doi: 10.1039/c1lc20257j. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Ma W., Liu Q.Y., Jung D., Manos P., Pancrazio J.J., Schaffner A.E., Barker J.L., Stenger D.A. Central neuronal synapse formation on micropatterned surfaces. Brain Res. Dev. Brain Res. 1998;111(2):231–243. doi: 10.1016/S0165-3806(98)00142-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Czöndör K., Garcia M., Argento A., Constals A., Breillat C., Tessier B., Thoumine O. Micropatterned substrates coated with neuronal adhesion molecules for high-content study of synapse formation. Nat. Commun. 2013;4:2252. doi: 10.1038/ncomms3252. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Whitesides G.M. The origins and the future of microfluidics. Nature. 2006;442(7101):368–373. doi: 10.1038/nature05058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Taylor A.M., Jeon N.L. Micro-scale and microfluidic devices for neurobiology. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2010;20(5):640–647. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2010.07.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79.Park J.K., Yeon J.H. Microfluidic cell culture systems for cellular analysis. Biochip. 2007;1:17–27. [Google Scholar]
- 80.Dexter J.P., Parker W. Parallel combinatorial chemical synthesis using single-layer poly(dimethylsiloxane) microfluidic devices. Biomicrofluidics. 2009;3(3):34106. doi: 10.1063/1.3230501. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Gorkin R., Park J., Siegrist J., Amasia M., Lee B.S., Park J.M., Kim J., Kim H., Madou M., Cho Y.K. Centrifugal microfluidics for biomedical applications. Lab Chip. 2010;10(14):1758–1773. doi: 10.1039/b924109d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Atencia J., Beebe D.J. Controlled microfluidic interfaces. Nature. 2005;437(7059):648–655. doi: 10.1038/nature04163. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Guo M.T., Rotem A., Heyman J.A., Weitz D.A. Droplet microfluidics for high-throughput biological assays. Lab Chip. 2012;12(12):2146–2155. doi: 10.1039/c2lc21147e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.George M., Whitesides E.O., Takayama S., Jiang X., Ingber D.E. Soft lithography in biology and biochemiestry. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2001;3:335–373. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.3.1.335. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Marcus J.S., Anderson W.F., Quake S.R. Microfluidic single-cell mRNA isolation and analysis. Anal. Chem. 2006;78(9):3084–3089. doi: 10.1021/ac0519460. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86.Jang K., Ngo H.T., Tanaka Y., Xu Y., Mawatari K., Kitamori T. Development of a microfluidic platform for single-cell secretion analysis using a direct photoactive cell-attaching method. Anal. Sci. 2011;27(10):973–978. doi: 10.2116/analsci.27.973. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87.van den Brink F.T., Gool E., Frimat J.P., Bomer J., van den Berg A., Le Gac S. Parallel single-cell analysis microfluidic platform. Electrophoresis. 2011;32(22):3094–3100. doi: 10.1002/elps.201100413. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88.Li L., Nachtergaele S., Seddon A.M., Tereshko V., Ponomarenko N., Ismagilov R.F. Simple host-guest chemistry to modulate the process of concentration and crystallization of membrane proteins by detergent capture in a microfluidic device. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008;130(43):14324–14328. doi: 10.1021/ja805361j. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89.Hansen C.L., Skordalakes E., Berger J.M., Quake S.R. A robust and scalable microfluidic metering method that allows protein crystal growth by free interface diffusion. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2002;99(26):16531–16536. doi: 10.1073/pnas.262485199. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90.Inamdar N.K., Borenstein J.T. Microfluidic cell culture models for tissue engineering. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2011;22(5):681–689. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2011.05.512. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91.Webster A., Greenman J., Haswell S.J. Development of microfluidic devices for biomedical and clinical application. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2011;86(1):10–17. doi: 10.1002/jctb.2482. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 92.Millet L.J., Gillette M.U. New perspectives on neuronal development via microfluidic environments. Trends Neurosci. 2012;35(12):752–761. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2012.09.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93.El-Ali J., Sorger P.K., Jensen K.F. Cells on chips. Nature. 2006;442(7101):403–411. doi: 10.1038/nature05063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94.Shin H.S., Kim H.J., Sim S.J., Jeon N.L. Shear stress effect on transfection of neurons cultured in microfluidic devices. J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 2009;9(12):7330–7335. doi: 10.1166/jnn.2009.1769. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95.Regehr K.J., Domenech M., Koepsel J.T., Carver K.C., Ellison-Zelski S.J., Murphy W.L., Schuler L.A., Alarid E.T., Beebe D.J. Biological implications of polydimethylsiloxane-based microfluidic cell culture. Lab Chip. 2009;9(15):2132–2139. doi: 10.1039/b903043c. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96.Toepke M.W., Beebe D.J. PDMS absorption of small molecules and consequences in microfluidic applications. Lab Chip. 2006;6(12):1484–1486. doi: 10.1039/b612140c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97.Heo Y.S., Cabrera L.M., Song J.W., Futai N., Tung Y.C., Smith G.D., Takayama S. Characterization and resolution of evaporation-mediated osmolality shifts that constrain microfluidic cell culture in poly(dimethylsiloxane) devices. Anal. Chem. 2007;79(3):1126–1134. doi: 10.1021/ac061990v. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98.Unger M.A., Chou H.P., Thorsen T., Scherer A., Quake S.R. Monolithic microfabricated valves and pumps by multilayer soft lithography. Science. 2000;288(5463):113–116. doi: 10.1126/science.288.5463.113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99.McDonald J.C., Duffy C.D., Anderson J.R., Whitesides G.M. Fabrication of microfluidic systems in poly(dimethylsiloxane). Electrophoresis. 2000;21:27–40. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1522-2683(20000101)21:1<27::AID-ELPS27>3.0.CO;2-C. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100.Taylor A.M. Microfluidic multicompartment device for neuroscience research. Langmuir. 2003;19(5):1551–1556. doi: 10.1021/la026417v. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101.Millet L.J., Stewart M.E., Nuzzo R.G., Gillette M.U. Guiding neuron development with planar surface gradients of substrate cues deposited using microfluidic devices. Lab Chip. 2010;10(12):1525–1535. doi: 10.1039/c001552k. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102.Taylor A.M., Dieterich D.C., Ito H.T., Kim S.A., Schuman E.M. Microfluidic local perfusion chambers for the visualization and manipulation of synapses. Neuron. 2010;66(1):57–68. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.03.022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103.Dworak B.J., Wheeler B.C. Novel MEA platform with PDMS microtunnels enables the detection of action potential propagation from isolated axons in culture. Lab Chip. 2009;9(3):404–410. doi: 10.1039/B806689B. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104.Pan L., Alagapan S., Franca E., Brewer G.J., Wheeler B.C. Propagation of action potential activity in a predefined microtunnel neural network. J. Neural Eng. 2011;8(4):046031. doi: 10.1088/1741-2560/8/4/046031. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105.Park J., Koito H., Li J., Han A. Multi-compartment neuron-glia co-culture platform for localized CNS axon-glia interaction study. Lab Chip. 2012;12(18):3296–3304. doi: 10.1039/c2lc40303j. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106.Hosmane S., Yang I.H., Ruffin A., Thakor N., Venkatesan A. Circular compartmentalized microfluidic platform: Study of axon-glia interactions. Lab Chip. 2010;10(6):741–747. doi: 10.1039/b918640a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107.Park J.W., Kim H.J., Byun J.H., Ryu H.R., Jeon N.L. Novel microfluidic platform for culturing neurons: culturing and biochemical analysis of neuronal components. Biotechnol. J. 2009;4(11):1573–1577. doi: 10.1002/biot.200900159. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108.Dinh N-D. Microfluidic construction of minimalistic neuronal cocultures. Lab. Chip. 2013;13(7):12–1402. doi: 10.1039/c3lc41224e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109.Huang Y., Williams J.C., Johnson S.M. Brain slice on a chip: opportunities and challenges of applying microfluidic technology to intact tissues. Lab Chip. 2012;12(12):2103–2117. doi: 10.1039/c2lc21142d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110.Crane M.M., Chung K., Stirman J., Lu H. Microfluidics-enabled phenotyping, imaging, and screening of multicellular organisms. Lab Chip. 2010;10(12):1509–1517. doi: 10.1039/b927258e. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111.Zhan M., Chingozha L., Lu H. Enabling systems biology approaches through microfabricated systems. Anal. Chem. 2013;85(19):8882–8894. doi: 10.1021/ac401472y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112.Dickson B.J. Molecular mechanisms of axon guidance. Science. 2002;298(5600):1959–1964. doi: 10.1126/science.1072165. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 113.Zweifel L.S., Kuruvilla R., Ginty D.D. Functions and mechanisms of retrograde neurotrophin signalling. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2005;6(8):615–625. doi: 10.1038/nrn1727. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114.Hur E.M., Yang I.H., Kim D.H., Byun J., Saijilafu, Xu W.L., Nicovich P.R., Cheong R., Levchenko A., Thakor N., Zhou F.Q. Engineering neuronal growth cones to promote axon regeneration over inhibitory molecules. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2011;108(12):5057–5062. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1011258108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 115.Bhattacharjee N., Li N., Keenan T.M., Folch A. A neuron-benign microfluidic gradient generator for studying the response of mammalian neurons towards axon guidance factors. Integr Biol (Camb) 2010;2(11-12):669–679. doi: 10.1039/c0ib00038h. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116.Hardy J., Selkoe D.J. The amyloid hypothesis of Alzheimer’s disease: progress and problems on the road to therapeutics. Science. 2002;297(5580):353–356. doi: 10.1126/science.1072994. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 117.Ittner L.M., Götz J. Amyloid-β and tau--a toxic pas de deux in Alzheimer’s disease. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2011;12(2):65–72. doi: 10.1038/nrn2967. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118.Dauer W., Przedborski S. Parkinson’s disease: mechanisms and models. Neuron. 2003;39(6):889–909. doi: 10.1016/S0896-6273(03)00568-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119.Taylor A.M., Blurton-Jones M., Rhee S.W., Cribbs D.H., Cotman C.W., Jeon N.L. A microfluidic culture platform for CNS axonal injury, regeneration and transport. Nat. Methods. 2005;2(8):599–605. doi: 10.1038/nmeth777. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120.Zhang K., Osakada Y., Vrljic M., Chen L., Mudrakola H.V., Cui B. Single-molecule imaging of NGF axonal transport in microfluidic devices. Lab Chip. 2010;10(19):2566–2573. doi: 10.1039/c003385e. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 121.Cohen M.S., Bas Orth C., Kim H.J., Jeon N.L., Jaffrey S.R. Neurotrophin-mediated dendrite-to-nucleus signaling revealed by microfluidic compartmentalization of dendrites. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2011;108(27):11246–11251. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1012401108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122.Xie W., Zhang K., Cui B. Functional characterization and axonal transport of quantum dot labeled BDNF. Integr Biol (Camb) 2012;4(8):953–960. doi: 10.1039/c2ib20062g. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 123.Mudrakola H.V., Zhang K., Cui B. Optically resolving individual microtubules in live axons. Structure. 2009;17(11):1433–1441. doi: 10.1016/j.str.2009.09.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 124.Kim H.J., Park J.W., Byun J.H., Poon W.W., Cotman C.W., Fowlkes C.C., Jeon N.L. Quantitative analysis of axonal transport by using compartmentalized and surface micropatterned culture of neurons. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2012;3(6):433–438. doi: 10.1021/cn3000026. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 125.Poon W.W., Blurton-Jones M., Tu C.H., Feinberg L.M., Chabrier M.A., Harris J.W., Jeon N.L., Cotman C.W. β-Amyloid impairs axonal BDNF retrograde trafficking. Neurobiol. Aging. 2011;32(5):821–833. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2009.05.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126.Stoothoff W., Jones P.B., Spires-Jones T.L., Joyner D., Chhabra E., Bercury K., Fan Z., Xie H., Bacskai B., Edd J., Irimia D., Hyman B.T. Differential effect of three-repeat and four-repeat tau on mitochondrial axonal transport. J. Neurochem. 2009;111(2):417–427. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2009.06316.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 127.McKeon R.J., Schreiber R.C., Rudge J.S., Silver J. Reduction of neurite outgrowth in a model of glial scarring following CNS injury is correlated with the expression of inhibitory molecules on reactive astrocytes. J. Neurosci. 1991;11(11):3398–3411. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.11-11-03398.1991. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 128.Paganetti P.A. Glioblastoma Infiltration into Central Nervous Systeml. J. Cell Biol. 1988;107:91–2281. doi: 10.1083/jcb.107.6.2281. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129.Kartje G.L. Corticostriatal plasticity is restricted by myelinassociated neurite growth inhibitors in the adult rat. Ann. Neurol. 1999;45:86–778. doi: 10.1002/1531-8249(199906)45:6<778::AID-ANA12>3.0.CO;2-B. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130.Kilinc D., Peyrin J.M., Soubeyre V., Magnifico S., Saias L., Viovy J.L., Brugg B. Wallerian-like degeneration of central neurons after synchronized and geometrically registered mass axotomy in a three-compartmental microfluidic chip. Neurotox. Res. 2011;19(1):149–161. doi: 10.1007/s12640-010-9152-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131.Li L., Ren L., Liu W., Wang J.C., Wang Y., Tu Q., Xu J., Liu R., Zhang Y., Yuan M.S., Li T., Wang J. Spatiotemporally controlled and multifactor involved assay of neuronal compartment regeneration after chemical injury in an integrated microfluidics. Anal. Chem. 2012;84(15):6444–6453. doi: 10.1021/ac3013708. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 132.Hosmane S., Fournier A., Wright R., Rajbhandari L., Siddique R., Yang I.H., Ramesh K.T., Venkatesan A., Thakor N. Valve-based microfluidic compression platform: single axon injury and regrowth. Lab Chip. 2011;11(22):3888–3895. doi: 10.1039/c1lc20549h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133.Kim Y.T., Karthikeyan K., Chirvi S., Davé D.P. Neuro-optical microfluidic platform to study injury and regeneration of single axons. Lab Chip. 2009;9(17):2576–2581. doi: 10.1039/b903720a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134.Vahidi B. Microfluidic-based strip assay for testing the effects of various surface-bound inhibitors in spinal cord injury. J. Neurosci. Methods. 2008;170:96–188. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2008.01.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 135.Shi P., Scott M.A., Ghosh B., Wan D., Wissner-Gross Z., Mazitschek R., Haggarty S.J., Yanik M.F. Synapse microarray identification of small molecules that enhance synaptogenesis. Nat. Commun. 2011;2:510. doi: 10.1038/ncomms1518. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 136.Figueroa X.A., Cooksey G.A., Votaw S.V., Horowitz L.F., Folch A. Large-scale investigation of the olfactory receptor space using a microfluidic microwell array. Lab Chip. 2010;10(9):1120–1127. doi: 10.1039/b920585c. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
