2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2014.09.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A direct heating model to overcome the edge effect in microplates

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…). As was expected from literature , a characteristic temperature distribution is observed during the heating phase with higher temperatures in the outer part than in the inner part of the plate. The heating phase takes about 30–40 min which also agrees well with previous data .…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 85%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…). As was expected from literature , a characteristic temperature distribution is observed during the heating phase with higher temperatures in the outer part than in the inner part of the plate. The heating phase takes about 30–40 min which also agrees well with previous data .…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Evaporation is assumed to cause these temperature variations within MTPs , and, thereby, also variations of enzyme kinetics . Plate sealing foils are often used to minimize evaporation and, thereby, edge effects . To quantify the temperature offset due to heat losses from evaporation, the MTPs were incubated on a shaken microplate tray in a temperature (36.3 ± 1.0°C) and humidity (45 ± 5%) controlled room.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Flat transparency microplates originally developed for enhanced cost effectiveness (34,38,39) may offer a viable alternative to standard deep-well microplates because molding, incorporation of additives, and irradiation treatment can be performed more uniformly during manufacture. These designs have also been demonstrated to be free of cross talk and thermal edge effects (33,3). Further work using other antibody pairs in validated ELISAs will also shed more light on the impact of microplate surface heterogeneities on immunoassay variability.…”
Section: Articlesmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…A major difficulty with immunoassays is assay variation attributed to both microplate-and nonmicroplate-associated factors, and compounded by a complicity of these factors leading to exacerbation of assay variability. Operator competency; microplate, calibrator, and reagent lot differences; microplate edge effects arising from temperature and evaporation rate differentials; and convective forces during assay incubation and washing steps have been reported to contribute to variations in well-to-well and plateto-plate signal read out (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8). Microplate variability with row and/or column effects within the microplate as well as systematic differences between microplates has been observed (7,8).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%