Something bit the bottom of my foot hurts after running
24 comments
Why bitcoin could surge to $40000video guide and best choice review
Systems exist for nearly every lab, workflow, and throughput level, even for many labs that believe automation is too complex or too expensive. High-end liquid handlers serve high-throughput workflows at large companies, but all automated systems share one characteristic. Full-blown robotic liquid handling systems are formidable, integrated systems with steep learning curves, but complexity is somewhat mitigated through improved interfaces.
Tecan, for example, has introduced a simple touch-screen interface for working through methods with the help of graphics, text, and application wizards.
At the mid-range level of complexity, vendors are taking advantage of their entry- or mid-level automation products to create application-specific systems that may be reconfigured down the road as workflow demands change.
This product development strategy requires balancing immediate needs with future-focused flexibility. The original, big-money driver for lab automation was high-throughput screening of drug candidates. Paradoxically, the market for liquid handling systems has increased as screening numbers dropped and labs increasingly look for greater consistency, says Michael Beier, product manager at Integra Biosciences Zizers, Switzerland , which specializes in liquid handlers that straddle the complexity continuum between handheld pipettes and fully automated systems.
The Viaflo 96 handheld channel pipette, for example, represents an interesting crossover product between handheld and low-level automated liquid handlers. The question of application specificity versus flexibility is one that customers and vendors continue to grapple with. In other situations, well-funded customers who do not anticipate significant assay changes might consider large, high-end automated workstations.
Beckman Coulter is in a similar position technologically. As a member of the Danaher family of life science companies, Beckman is able to exploit sample preparation expertise from its sister companies that extends into cellular, genomic, and proteomic applications. And like many automation companies, it regularly collaborates with other automation companies to deliver customized products.
Lab automation in general, and liquid handling in particular, could not progress as far as it has without these partnerships. The trend toward miniaturization and personalization has fueled demand for mid-range liquid handlers that are more sophisticated than automated manual pipettors but lack the complexity and capabilities of large robotic systems. As the name implies, these liquid handlers are smaller and deliver volumes in the low to mid-range, from 25 nanoliters up to 5 microliters.
Compared with many large robotic systems, mosquito is viewed as low to medium throughput. Moreover, the systems integrate well with robotics. Users can employ a plate handler and stacker, or can aim for even bigger things.
TTP Labtech has partnered with Tecan, for example, to integrate a mosquito with Tecan robotics and software, which extends the capabilities of both systems. The first involves less reliance on core automation facilities; the second is the need for systems dedicated to one task.
Laboratories increasingly appreciate reproducibility, consistency across operators and labs, error reduction, and walkaway time. Application-specific modules are built on these to a high degree of specificity. And core automation facilities still operate for complex workflows and high-throughput projects, but the benchtop norm has been redefined toward greater capability and, simultaneously, user-friendliness.
Calibration and maintenance have always been sticking points with instrument users. This is true with liquid handlers as well, whether dealing with single-channel manual pipettes or dispensing heads for large systems. Labs have many convenient options for pipette calibration.
Kits are available for in-house gravimetric calibration by technicians or end users. Lab managers often turn for calibration to original vendors, who provide on-site calibration services for large groups or departments or service via standard delivery services. Some manufacturers even provide loaner pipettes when turnaround is expected to be lengthy.
Despite these choices, many users simply will not part with their favorite pipette for a week or have a liquid handler sit idle for a similar length of time.
Eppendorf has eliminated some of the burden of calibration record-keeping by installing radiofrequency identification RFID chips into all its manual and electronic pipettes. RFID stores more information than most pipette operators require to remain in compliance—for example, serial number, date and type of service, and usage.
In some cases the upper and lower parts of instruments get mixed up, and nobody knows which reassembled pipette the certificate belongs to. Eppendorf has recently introduced TrackIT software, which uses a USB-style scanner to read and store calibration information.
TrackIT allows users to enter additional information as per company policy or regulations. Eppendorf has similar tracking systems for single- or multichannel pipetting heads used in automated liquid handlers.
The final word on maintenance involves not instrumentation, but lab workers. Pre-purchase considerations are as varied as liquid handlers themselves. Purchasing a handheld pipette, for example, is a low-budget personal choice, while a fully robotic liquid handling system is a capital expenditure. Semi-automated systems are simpler than robotics and spare end users from extensive training. They should consider options in between, which may be more economical and, for many workflows, more efficient.
It all comes down to understanding workflows, Beier adds. Without fully automating, a ninety-six-channel pipette improves throughput significantly compared with a conventional handheld pipette.
Managers need also to consider how many people will be using the instrument. Workflow includes individual process steps as well as specific liquid handling steps and bottlenecks based on anticipated throughput.
Some processes or steps might work well with existing equipment, while it may make sense to automate other operations. Anticipated benefits range from increased walkaway time, accuracy, and precision to the ability to introduce uniformity to operations prone to human error. Lab managers might, for example, notice variations from technician to technician or at certain times of day when other things are occurring in the laboratory.
Other common considerations are the throughputs, batch sizes, and types or viscosities of reagents a lab works with. Purchasers should consider whether they purchase reagents or make them up in the lab, in what quantities, and the value of consistency.
Greene believes that dedicated, application-specific customization is a smart business strategy from the perspective of product differentiation. And if it goes into a core facility, a lot of people will be sharing it. This is where smaller, modular approaches can be more appropriate. For Jones-Roe of Beckman Coulter, purchase decisions should be based on trusted partnerships with vendors, scientific expertise, product knowledge, and a high level of support in hardware, software, and applications writing.
Is it versatile or locked down? Can you add or remove components? Despite the trend toward application-specific automation, users should be wary of entering an automation cul-de-sac. For example, Tecan has learned through customer surveys that many closed, dedicated liquid handling systems eventually go idle. Determining the most appropriate mix of current utility and future flexibility is therefore a critical part of early discussions with automation vendors.
What happens when your lab is no longer performing PCR? At some level, purchasers should seek systems that, with the assistance of the vendor or in-house automation experts, may be reconfigured for future projects.
Vendors of some systems claim, for example, to dispense 1 microliter volumes that are common in modern low-volume assays. Think concentrated buffer versus glycerol or oil. Lab managers considering the purchase of an automated liquid handler must consider current needs while remaining open to future workflow demands. Labs should question vendors about upgradability and interoperability particularly with respect to components already in the lab , assess available literature, and whenever possible put systems through their paces.
Tools and Technologies for the Materials Testing Lab. New Developments in Microplate Technology. Tools and Technologies for Biosafety. Selecting a Multi-vendor Service Provider. Personal Protective Equipment for the Lab.
New Developments in Mass Spectrometry. Tools and Technologies for Forensic Sciences. Stop Drowning in Paper! Role of mid-range systems The trend toward miniaturization and personalization has fueled demand for mid-range liquid handlers that are more sophisticated than automated manual pipettors but lack the complexity and capabilities of large robotic systems.
Care and maintenance Calibration and maintenance have always been sticking points with instrument users. Purchase considerations Pre-purchase considerations are as varied as liquid handlers themselves.
For pipettes, Mercier suggests: Find a comfortable, ergonomic fit to prevent poor pipetting technique, which affects accuracy and precision. Look for pipettes and tips that were designed together. Avoid the cul-de-sac Despite the trend toward application-specific automation, users should be wary of entering an automation cul-de-sac. Tablet with microplate app and electronic pipette are first Internet of Things devices in the Gilson Connect Family.
Published In Safe Enough? Tools and Technologies for Biosafety Thursday June 14, Sign In Forgot your password?