Techniques for Electro- and Magnetokinetic Particle Characterization

  • Wolfgang Schütt
  • Cordula Grüttner
  • Bernd Paulke
  • Phil Goetz
  • Nobuya Hashimoto
Chapter

Abstract

The applicability of magnetic particles is strongly dependent on the electric surface charge and the magnetic susceptibility of the individual particles. Particle electrophoresis is a common method to control the production process and to assess the final colloidal solution. Particles within a wide size range are used and different measuring principles must therefore be applied. Laser based techniques using the Doppler or image transduction effect are very useful for the estimation of the mean electrophoretic mobility of particles within the size range below 500 nm. Automated techniques with image analysis are preferred for the analysis of mixtures of particles with sizes larger than 500 nm and with a broad variation of the surface charge. Electrophoretic fingerprints representing the mean electrophoretic mobility of a given particle suspension versus pH and ionic strength of the media are a helpful method for the assessment of the production and modification procedure of particles.

Keywords

Electrophoretic Mobility Magnetic Particle Magnetic Carrier Cell Electrophoresis Applied Electric Field Strength 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sherbet GV (1978).The Biophysical Characterization of the Cell Surface. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schütt W and Klinkmann H (Eds.) (1985).Cell Electrophoresis. De Gruyter, Berlin-New York.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bauer J (1994). Cell Electrophoresis. CRC Press Inc.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Marlow BJ and Rowell RL (1991).Electrophoretic Fingerprinting of a single acid site polymer colloid latex. Langmuir 7, 2974–2980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hannig K, Wirth H, Meyer BH and Zeiller K (1975). Free-Flow Electrophoresis. Hoppe-Seyler’s Z. Physiol. Chem. 356, 1209–1223.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weber G (1996). First Int. Con£ “Scientific and Clinical Applications of Magnetic Carriers”, Rostock.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mel HC (1964). Stable-flow free boundary migration and fractionation of all mixtures. J. Theor. Biol. 6, 159–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kolin A (1978). Some current and potential uses of magnetic fields in electrokinetic separations. J. Chromatography159147–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hierten S (1977). Analysis and purification of cells with the Free Zone Electrophoresis equipment. In: Bloementhal H (Ed.). Cell Separation Method, Elsevier/North-Holland Biomedical Press 231–239.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Catsimpoolas N (1980). Principles and instrumentation of analytical cell electrophoresis. Electrophoresis 1, 73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goetz PJ (1985). System 3000 Automated Electrokinetic Analyzer for biomedical application. In Cell Electrophoresis. Schutt W and Klinkmann H (Eds.), De Gruyter, Berlin-New York, 41–53.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaplan E and Uzgiris E (1976). Identification of T and B cell subpopulations in human peripheral blood: electrophoretic mobility distributions associated with surface marker characteristics. J. Immunol. 117, 1732–1743.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bartels PH, Olson GB, Bartels HG and Seaman GVF (1981). The automated analytical electrophoresis microscope. Cell Biophys. 7, 373–390. Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hashimoto N, in preparation.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pohl A and Schütt W (1978). Increased reliability and productivity of cell electrophoresis by objectivated and automated measurements and data processing,Jenaer Rundschau 6, 270–280.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schutt W, Hayashi H et al (1985). Automated single cell electrophoresis realized in Parmoguant. In Cell Electrophoresis. Schutt W and Klinkmann H (Eds.), De Gruyter, Berlin — New York 55–67.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schutt W, Hashimoto N and Shimizu M (1994). Application of cell electrophoresis for clinical diagnosis. In Cell Electrophoresis. Bauer J (Ed.), CRC Press, 255–266. Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schutt W, Grümmer G, Preece A and Goetz PJ (1991). Principles of cell electrophoresis. In Physical Characterization of Biological Cells. Schutt W, Klinkmann H, Lamprecht I and Wilson T ( Eds. ), Verlag Gesundheit GmbH, Berlin.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grümmer G, Goetz Ph and Schutt W (1990). Int. Meeting “Applied Cell Biophysics”, Rostock.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Marlow BJ, Fairhurst D and Schütt W (1988). Electrophoretic Fingerprinting and the biological activity of colloid indicators. Langmuir 4, 776–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Paulke BR, Möglich PM, Knippel E, Budde A, Nitzsche R and Müller RH (1995). Electrophoretic 3D-mobility profiles of latex particles with different surface groups. Langmuir 11, 70–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tchikov V, Kuznetzov AA and Schütt W (1991). Analytical cell magnetophoresis. In Physical Characterization of Biological Cells. Schutt W, Klinkmann H, Lamprecht I and Wilson T, Verlag Gesundheit, Berlin, 379–390.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Winoto-Morbach S, Tchikov V, Treumer J and Müller-Ruchholtz W (1996) First Int. Conf. “Scientific and Clinical Applications of Magnetic Carriers”, Rostock.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zborowski M et al, see this book.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reddy S, Moore LR, Liping Sun, Zborowski M and Chalmers JJ (1996). Determination of the magnetic susceptibility of labeled particles by video imaging. Chem. Eng. Science 6, 947–956.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wolfgang Schütt
    • 1
    • 2
  • Cordula Grüttner
    • 3
  • Bernd Paulke
    • 4
  • Phil Goetz
    • 5
  • Nobuya Hashimoto
    • 2
  1. 1.University RostockRostockGermany
  2. 2.Jikei University Medical SchoolJapan
  3. 3.MicroCaps GmbHRostockGermany
  4. 4.Fraunhofer Instituts of Polymer ResearchTeltowGermany
  5. 5.Pen Kern Inc.New YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations