Table 3. Summary of mitochondrial isolation methods (Nanoscale).

A table highlighting the relative benefits and disadvantages of different methods of nanoscale mitochondrial isolation, incorporating either density gradient centrifugation (DGC), differential centrifugation (DC) or none. Techniques compared relative to the performance of DGC alone *: ++ = higher; + = slightly higher or similar; - = lower; nFAMS = Nano-Fluorescence Activated Mitochondrial Sorting; NGS = next generation sequencing; NT = nanotweezers MS = Mass spectrometry.

Isolation Method	Prior Fractionation	Mitochondrial Yield *	Mitochondrial Purity *	Starting Material *	Expense *	Throughput *	Subcellular Spatial Precision	Fluorescent labelling	Serial Sampling	Confirmation	General Comments	References
nFAMS	DGC	++	++	-	+	++	No	Yes	No	fluorescence microscopy, MS, qPCR	High selectivity; shear damage may impact mitochondrial viability; dyes may induce aggregation	MacDonald et al. (2019)
Nanobiopsy	None	-	++	-	++	-	Yes	Yes	Yes	fluorescence microscopy, NGS, SICM	Maintains cellular environment and viability; limited selectivity	Actis et al. (2014a)
NT	None	-	++	-	++	-	Yes	Yes	Yes	fluorescence microscopy	Maintains cell viability and natural environment; limited selectivity	Nadappuram et al. (2019)