This application is related to pending U.S. application Ser. No. 12/125,735, filed May 22, 2008, the contents of which are incorporated by reference herein for all purposes.
This invention relates to determining the presence of analytes in a sample and more specifically to apparatus and methods which employ an array of capture elements immobilized on a substrate which respond when exposed to a sample to provide patterns of binding events.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,594,011 issued Jul. 15, 2003 describes an apparatus which employs a substrate with an array of capture elements immobilized on the top surface of the substrate. When the array is exposed to a fluid sample, patterns of binding events occur in the array depending on the analytes present in the sample. The patterns of binding events are captured by directing a beam of polarized light through a prism abutting the bottom surface of the substrate. The beam is directed at an angle to obtain total internal reflection (TIR) and to generate an evanescent field in the plane of the array. The pattern of binding events is imposed on a detection device such as a CCD camera and compared with a stored image of the array captured prior to exposure to the sample. The localized changes in the intensities of reflected light and the locations of those changes in the array are representative of the various analytes present in the sample.
In accordance with the principles of this invention, the bottom surface of a substrate which either has or is intended to have an array of capture elements immobilized on its top surface, is configured to have a plurality of prisms which have a sawtooth cross-sectional shape. The prisms conveniently align as wedges parallel to either rows or columns of wells in the plate, and are comprised of outer planes (e.g., entrance and exit faces) that are non-parallel to the top surface of the substrate. Further, the incident prism face (aperture) for the light has to be sufficiently large and the substrate to which the prisms are coupled has to be sufficiently thick to limit divergence of the incident beam and to ensure the light enters and exits the prism film in a way which minimizes effects on beam polarization, respectively.
The size of the sawtooth prism pattern is important because the design allows for the possibility of imaging a surface up to a millimeter past the sawtooth structure which requires minimizing diffraction effects. The structural design of the present disclosure is thus distinguished from a diffraction grating which splits and diffracts light into several beams traveling in different directions based on the wavelength. For a diffraction grating, the grating spacing (pitch), and angles of the incident and diffracted beams follow what is known as the grating equation and diffraction is required to achieve the desired effect. Although diffraction can never be eliminated, the effects may be reduced to acceptable levels by adhering to the geometric constraints discussed below.
The sawtooth prism pattern disclosed herein can be formed in a film which can be attached to the substrate bottom surface in the absence of an index matching fluid, or the bottom surface may have an integral sawtooth bottom configuration in another embodiment. The “substrate” herein should be transparent to the light used for detection and have sufficiently low surface roughness at the top surface where total internal reflection (TIR) occurs. This substrate can be comprised of a transparent material, such as glass or plastic, and can be integral to or a part of the entire disposable. Typically, the substrate will either have the dimensions of a microscope slide or have a length and width close to the glass and plastic substrates used in glass bottom multiwell plates. In accordance with ANSI/SBS standards for multiwell plates, typical configurations for the disposables are slides with wells (9 mm center-to-center spacing for 96 well plates and 4.5 mm spacing for 384-well plates), and glass bottom 96-well and 384-well plates. It is also possible that the substrate can be a part of a microfluidic disposable device with precisely patterned channels on the top surface of the substrate and a prism film attached to the bottom surface.
Prior to describing embodiments of the present disclosure in greater detail, the following definition is provided for use throughout the present document.
Sawtooth: A jagged or zigzag repeating pattern, outline, or course. In one embodiment, the cross-section of each prism is, illustratively, a right triangle sawtooth.
The present disclosure relates to apparatus and methods for determining the occurrence of binding events between different ligands in an array of ligands immobilized on the top surface of a transparent substrate and analytes in a sample to which the array is exposed. In one embodiment of the present disclosure, the bottom surface of the substrate has a sawtooth cross-sectional geometry with each prism (e.g., a right triangle prism) parallel with the rows or with the columns of the array of ligands. Each prism may extend across the entire substrate (a few inches for a 96-well plate for example) or be any length less than the substrate dimension. For example, each prism may extend only across a single well (underneath a 96-well plate) so that each prism is 7.5 mm long, allowing for flat regions between wells that can be used for light intensity calibration. The “sawtooth” geometry is useful for any related technology which directs light into the bottom surface of a substrate which has, or is intended to have on the top surface thereof an array of capture elements (ligands) to test for the presence of analytes in a sample.
Although the cross section geometry of a sawtooth is easily visualized as is the alignment of “tooth” wedges with a row (or column) of an array, there are some constraints on the geometry. Specifically, it has been realized that once the area of an array is determined (by choice), the thickness of the substrate, the index of refraction of the substrate and the entrance and exit faces of the wedges are constrained. If the apparatus further includes multiple test sites, the spacing between cells also becomes a constraint.
The sawtooth is formed with outer faces that are non-parallel to the plane of the top surface of the substrate but which form right angles between adjacent faces in one embodiment. In other embodiments, the sawtooth may be formed entirely with outer faces that are non-parallel to the plane of the substrate top surface and which do not form right angles between adjacent faces. The second embodiment is useful for disposable designs where the incoming light would not be incident perpendicular to the first surface of each prism.
It is noted that the disclosure herein is described illustratively with respect to the apparatus described in the above-mentioned U.S. Pat. No. 6,594,011 but may be used with various apparatus using light from beneath a substrate to image patterns of binding events, for example via spatially-distributed polarization changes or other techniques.
The following disclosure presents equations and graphs relating the ranges of parameter choices once a field of view (FOV) is decided. In an experimental apparatus the sawtooth microprism film structure was defined in a two-component film separate from the substrate. The film consisted of a plastic material (COC) bound to a UV cured polymer formed into the shape of microprisms and an adhesive was used to adhere the film to the bottom surface of the substrate. No fluid interface was necessary and the sawtooth microprisms were laminated directly on the substrate bottom surface. In the production of high volume prism film disposable structures, care must be taken to avoid introducing stress birefringence in the prism films themselves. For example, in a lamination process, this is achieved by controlling the pressure between the roller and the substrates and the tension in the unwinding film. The most important specification is not the total birefringence but the birefringence variability in the prism film. A constant but uniform birefringence in the film can be compensated for with an appropriate optical coating on the top surface of the substrate whereas too much birefringence variability will impact the repeatability of an optical measurement made through the underside of such a disposable.
A prism film structure, in one embodiment, may be comprised of four different materials which create the stack structure: the prisms (UV polymer), the plastic substrate (COC), the adhesive, and the glass. In order to have a complete equation for the maximum field of view, we need two (2) parameters for every material in the stack. An approximation is to treat the prism film structure as being made of a single material so that the field of view can be written in terms of the overall thickness and average refractive index only. This approximation is valid as long as effort is made to index match all four materials as closely as possible. If we define the field of view as measured along the direction of light propagation only and let T stand for thickness of the substrate and n stand for the index of refraction of the substrate, the following constraints exist for the maximum field of view (FOV):
The first constraint ensures that reflected light does not exit prisms of the wrong orientation and the second constraint ensures that the entry and exit portions of the prism field do not extend beyond the well-well spacing of 9 mm. Accordingly, an allowable combination of FOV and substrate thickness must fit within the triangular region in the graph shown in
One way to read the graph of
Referring now to
The sawtooth prisms can be seen in layer 19 to comprise outer faces (or facets) which are non-parallel to the substrate top (or bottom) surface. In one embodiment, the sawtooth prisms in layer 19 consist of only outer faces (or facets), which are non-parallel to the substrate top/bottom surfaces 14, 15. A prism facet 20a has a dimension X and the sawtooth layer 19 has a thickness H and a period P as indicated in
A ligand (protein) array 25 is provided at the top surface 14 of substrate 12. In some embodiments, the ligand array may extend across the entire surface of the substrate. In other embodiment, the same array is repeated at the bottom of every well of a glass-bottom, 96-well plate where the spatial extent of the ligand array may cover 7.5 mm×4.5 mm at the center of each well. For any complete structure with a fixed well-to-well spacing, the alternating sawtooth pattern period must scale directly with that well spacing.
The sawtooth-shaped prism configuration for the substrate bottom surface has the attractive characteristic of virtually eliminating multiple reflections of an incident light beam. The reason for this is that the sawtooth does not have faces (or facets) parallel to the plane of the micro array of ligands (i.e., the substrate top surface).
Diffraction is also an important constraint on the sawtooth geometry. The light entering each of the (sawtooth) prisms will diverge due to diffraction. It is preferable that the light diverges no more than about 0.5 degrees before striking the (protein) array. To limit the divergence, the shorter dimension (X) of the entry face of any prism is determined by:
where φ is the divergence half angle of the beam.
If φ≦0.5°, then X≧50 microns at a wavelength of about 450 nm. As a result, the pitch,
where θ is the angle of incidence of the incoming light with respect to the plane of the microarray, would have to be greater than 95 microns in this example. For a test apparatus with prism material having an index of refraction n of 1.58, the ideal angle of incidence (AOI) is 58.3 degrees as shown in
In one experimental apparatus, a “disposable” device as shown in
In one embodiment, on the top surface of the glass substrate, spatially distinct areas with different optical coatings were used, each of which corresponded to a different sensitivity to molecular attachment and thus, a different detectable analyte concentration range. Ligand arrays were formed partially on the different coated areas to take advantage of the different sensitivities to molecular attachment which expands the dynamic range of protein detection to five or more orders of magnitude.
Several prism films were made and tested; and the films had the following dimensions: Length: 25-30 mm; Width: 17-21 mm; Polymer thickness=0.17 mm; Substrate thickness=0.08 mm; Prism Pitches ranged from 40-120 microns; X had a range from 21-63 microns; and T glass=1 mm.
Test results were as follows.
In order to determine how the prism films affect the polarization of the light beam, height determinations were made of the slide standards with known height standards of silicon dioxide coatings on the surface. These measurements were compared to the case where a glass prism is used which is known to have very little birefringence and thus, has negligible effect on the light polarization that propagates through the system. The results show that the signal sensitivity of the prism films were 93%±5% of the glass prism case with a spot to spot variation of 3.3%±0.3%, comparable to the spot to spot variation seen in the glass prism case.
A substrate with a bottom surface configured as a sawtooth shaped prism in accordance with the present disclosure can be used to advantage in any system for determining the presence of an analyte in a sample so long as light is incident to the bottom surface of a substrate in a manner to obtain total internal reflection and an evanescent field in the plane of the top surface of the substrate. The substrate may comprise a single glass slide like a microscope slide 400 juxtaposed with a top member with a plurality of through holes to form an assembly as shown by member 400 in
The foregoing detailed description of embodiments of the present disclosure is presented for purposes of illustration and disclosure in accordance with the requirements of the law. It is not intended to be exhaustive nor to limit the invention to the precise form(s) described, but only to enable others skilled in the art to understand how the invention may be suited for a particular use or implementation. The possibility of modifications and variations will be apparent to practitioners skilled in the art. No limitation is intended by the description of embodiments which may have included tolerances, feature dimensions, specific operating conditions, engineering specifications, or the like, and which may vary between implementations or with changes to the state of the art, and no limitation should be implied therefrom. This disclosure has been made with respect to the current state of the art, but also contemplates advancements and that adaptations in the future may take into consideration those advancements, namely in accordance with the then current state of the art. It is intended that the scope of the invention be defined by the claims as written and equivalents as applicable. Reference to a claim element in the singular is not intended to mean “one and only one” unless explicitly so stated. Moreover, no element, component nor method or process step in this disclosure is intended to be dedicated to the public regardless of whether the element, component or step is explicitly recited in the claims. No claim element herein is to be construed under the provisions of 35 USC Sec. 112, sixth paragraph, unless the element is expressly recited using the phrase “means for . . . ” and no method or process step herein is to be construed under those provisions unless the step, or steps, are expressly recited using the phrase “step(s) for . . . ”.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1637141 | Cooper | Jul 1927 | A |
| 3177759 | Wilkes, Jr. et al. | Apr 1965 | A |
| 3279307 | Wilkes, Jr. et al. | Oct 1966 | A |
| 3858616 | Thiery et al. | Jan 1975 | A |
| 4146365 | Kay et al. | Mar 1979 | A |
| 4238565 | Hornby et al. | Dec 1980 | A |
| 4256834 | Zuk et al. | Mar 1981 | A |
| 4508832 | Carter et al. | Apr 1985 | A |
| 5164589 | Sjoedin | Nov 1992 | A |
| 5225164 | Astle | Jul 1993 | A |
| 5229833 | Stewart | Jul 1993 | A |
| 5234769 | Shevlin | Aug 1993 | A |
| 5255075 | Cush | Oct 1993 | A |
| 5313264 | Ivarsson et al. | May 1994 | A |
| 5341215 | Seher | Aug 1994 | A |
| 5437840 | King et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
| 5446534 | Goldman | Aug 1995 | A |
| 5483346 | Butzer | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5485277 | Foster | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5491097 | Ribi et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
| 5491556 | Stewart et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
| 5573956 | Hanning | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5593130 | Hansson et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
| 5633724 | King et al. | May 1997 | A |
| 5641640 | Hanning | Jun 1997 | A |
| RE35716 | Stapleton et al. | Jan 1998 | E |
| 5738825 | Rudigier et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5753518 | Karlsson | May 1998 | A |
| 5796858 | Zhou et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5813439 | Herrero et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5856873 | Naya et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5922594 | Loefas | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5922604 | Stapleton et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5955729 | Nelson et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5965456 | Malmqvist et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5972612 | Malmqvist et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 6008010 | Greenberger et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6008893 | Roos et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6026053 | Satorius | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6045996 | Cronin et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6065501 | Feret et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6127183 | Ivarsson et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6140044 | Bessemer et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6143513 | Loefas | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6143574 | Karlsson et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6197595 | Anderson et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6200814 | Malmqvist et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6207381 | Larsson et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6253793 | Dupoiron et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6277330 | Liu et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6289286 | Andersson et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6354333 | Dupoiron et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6355429 | Nygren et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6415825 | Dupoiron et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6475809 | Wagner et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
| 6493097 | Ivarsson | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6503760 | Malmqvist et al. | Jan 2003 | B2 |
| D472644 | Dawson et al. | Apr 2003 | S |
| 6549011 | Flatt | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6589798 | Loefas | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6594011 | Kempen | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| D480149 | Dawson et al. | Sep 2003 | S |
| 6698454 | Sjoelander et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
| 6710870 | Marowsky et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6714303 | Ivarsson | Mar 2004 | B2 |
| 6806051 | Ellson | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 6810286 | Donovan et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 6833920 | Rassman et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
| 6859280 | Kempen | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 6882420 | Rassman et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
| 6981526 | Glejbol et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 7045287 | Smith et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7193711 | Rassman et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7195872 | Agrawal et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 20020019019 | Hamalainen et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020154311 | Ivarsson | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020182717 | Karlsson | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030022388 | Roos et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030067612 | Ivarsson | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030112432 | Yguerabide et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030148401 | Agrawal et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030205681 | Modlin | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030232384 | Kocher et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20040002167 | Andersson et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040012676 | Weiner et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040023247 | Xu et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040030504 | Helt et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040038268 | Pirrung et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20050017191 | Montagu et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050148063 | Cracauer et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20060263874 | Kunuki et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20090237670 | Osborne et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 742417 | Feb 2000 | AU |
| 0257955 | Mar 1988 | EP |
| 2116839 | Nov 2009 | EP |
| 11304693 | Nov 1999 | JP |
| WO 8911057 | Nov 1989 | WO |
| WO 9100467 | Jan 1991 | WO |
| WO 9522754 | Aug 1995 | WO |
| WO 9608720 | Mar 1996 | WO |
| WO 9638729 | Dec 1996 | WO |
| WO 9719375 | May 1997 | WO |
| WO 9832002 | Jul 1998 | WO |
| WO 03056337 | Jul 2003 | WO |
| WO 03102580 | Dec 2003 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| International Search Report, issued Mar. 4, 2011, by the European Patent Office in connection with International Application No. PCT/US2010/059854. |
| Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, issued Mar. 4, 2011, 2008, by the European Patent Office in connection with International Application No. PCT/US2010/059854. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 11/677,674, Dultz et al. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 11/748,023, Dultz et al. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 11/696,369, Dultz. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 11/752,056, Dultz. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/125,685, Dultz. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/125,735, Dultz et al. |
| Tadashi Saitoh, et al.“Optical Characterization of Very Thin Hydrogenated Amorphous Silicon Films Using Spectroscopic Ellipsometry”; Japanese Journal of Applied Physics; vol. 30, No. 11B, Nov. 1991. pp. L1914-L1916. |
| “Handbook of Optics”, Michael Bass Editor in Chief, by The Optical Society of America; vol. 1; pp. 4.23, 4.24; 1995 McGraw-Hill, Inc. |
| Bass, et al. “Handbook of Optics”, by The Optical Society of America; vol. 1; Section 41.10; 1995 McGraw-Hill, Inc. |
| Gang Jin et al. “Imaging Ellipsometry Revisited: Developments for Visualization of Thin Transparent Layers on Silicon Substrates”, American Institute of Physics, Rev. Sci. Instrum., pp. 2930-2936, Aug. 1996. |
| Max Born et al. “Principles of Optics—Electromagnetic Theory of Propagation, Interference and Diffraction of Light”, Sixth Edition, pp. 47-51 Pergamon Press. |
| Eggins, “Biosensors: An Introduction”, pp. 112-113, 1987 John Wiley & Sons. |
| Danny Van Noort et al. “Monitoring Specific Interaction of Low Molecular Weight Biomolecules on Oxidized Porous Silicon Using Ellipsometry”, Biosensors & Bioelectronics vol. 13, No. 3-4 pp. 439-449, 1998 Elsevier Science, S.A. Great Britain. |
| Gang Jin et al. “Imaging Ellipsometry for Biosensor Applications” Transducers '95. Eurosensors IX, Digest of Technical Papers vol. 2, Sessions A7-D13, Papers No. 232-496 pp. 509-512, Stockholm, Sweden, Jun. 1995. |
| Jinyu Wang “Waveguide Ellipsometry Biosensors: Concept and Preliminary Analysis”, SPIE vol. 1648, Fiber Optical Medical and Fluorescent Sensors and Applications pp. 44-50, 1992. |
| Ulf Jonsson et al. “Flow-Injection Ellipsometry—An in Situ Method for the Study of Biomolecular Adsorption and Interaction at Solid Surfaces,” Colloids and Surfaces, 13 (1985) pp. 333-339, 1985 Elsevier Science Publishers BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. |
| Jonsson, Ulf et al. “Biosensors Based on Surface Concentration Measuring Devices—The Concept of Surface Concentration” Progress in Colloid and Polymer Sci. vol. 70, pp. 96-100, 1985. |
| Schena, Mark “DNA Microarrays: A Practical Approach” Edited by Mark Schena, Department of Biochemistry, Beckman Center, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, USA, Oxford University Press, 1999. |
| Schema, PhD. Mark, “Microarray Biochip Technology” TeleChem International, Inc., Sunnyvale, California, USA, A BioTechniques Books Publication, Eaton Publishing, pp. 10-11, 2000. |
| Harland G. Tompkins, et al. “Spectroscopic Ellipsometry and Reflectometry a User's Guide” A Wiley-Interscience Publication, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1999. |
| Ulf Jonsson et al. “Surface Immobilization Techniques in Combination with Ellipsometry” Methods in Enzymology vol. 137, Immobilized Enzymes and Cells Part D pp. 381-1351, 1988 Academic Press, Inc. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers. |
| Ch Striebel et al. “Characterization of Biomembranes by Spectral Ellipsometry, Surface Plasmon Resonance and Interferometry with Regard to Biosensor Application”, Biosensors & Bioelectronics 9, pp. 139-146, 1994 Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd. |
| T.A. Ruzgas et al. “Ellipsometric Immunosensors for the Determination of γ-Interferon and Human Serum Albumin”, Biosensors & Bioelectronics 7, pp. 305-308, 1992 Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd. |
| Haken Nygren et al. “Determination by Ellipsometry of the Affinity of Monoclonal Antibodies”, Journal of Immunological Methods, 92, pp. 219-225, 1986 Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd. |
| John F. Place et al. “Opto-electronic Immunosensors: A Review of Optical Immunoassay at Continuous Surfaces”, Biosensors 1, pp. 321-353, 1985 Elsevier Applied Science Publishers Ltd., England. |
| A. Brecht et al. “Biosensors: Fundamentals, Technologies and Applications” GBF Monographs, vol. 17, pp. 174-178, 1991 Germany. |
| Hakan Nygren et al. “Kinetics of Antibody-Binding to Surface-Immobilized Antigen: Influence of Mass Transport on the Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA)”, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, vol. 107, No. 2 pp. 560-566, Oct. 1985 Academic Press, Inc. |
| Martin Malmsten et al. “Effects of Hydrophilization and Immobilization on the Interfacial Behavior of Immunoglobulins”, Journal of Colloid and Interface Sicence 177, pp. 70-78, 1996 Academic Press, Inc. |
| Pentti Tengvall et al. “Temporal Studies on the Deposition of Complement on Human Colostrum IgA and Serum Immobilized on Methylated Silicon”, Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, vol. 35, pp. 81-91, 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. |
| Huaiyou Wang et al. “Assembly of Antibodies in Lipid Membranes for Biosensor Development”, Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, vol. 53 pp. 163-181, 1995 Humana Press Inc. |
| G. Elender et al. “Wetting and Dewetting of Si/SiO2-Wafers by Free and Lipid-Monolayer Covered Aqueous Solutions Under Controlled Humidity”, Journal de Physique, II France 4 pp. 455-479, Mar. 1994. |
| C.F. Mandenius et al. “Coupling of Biomolecules to Silicon Surfaces for use in ellipsometry and other related techniques”, Methods in Enzymology, vol. 137, pp. 389-394, 1988 Academic Press, Inc. |
| A.W. Flounders et al. “Patterning of immobilized antibody layers via photolithography and oxygen plasma exposure”, Biosensors and Bioelectronics, vol. 12, No. 6 pp. 447-456, 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd., Great Britain. |
| A. Ahluwalia et al. “A comparative study of protein immobilization techniques for optical immunosensors”, Biosensors and Bioelectronics 7, (1991) pp. 207-214, 1992 Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd. |
| Dr. Rudolf Oldenbourg “Metamorph Imaging System”, http://www.image1.com/products/metapolscope/ Universal Imaging Corporation Last Updated Jun. 10, 1999 pp. 1-2. |
| Dr. Rudolf Oldenbourg “A new view on polarization microscopy”, Nature, vol. 381, pp. 811-812, Jun. 27, 1996. |
| Clifford C. Hoyt et al. “Structural analysis with quantitative birefringence imaging”, American Laboratory, pp. 34-42, Jul. 1999. |
| Dirk Honig et al. “Direct visualization of monolayers at the air-water interface by Brewster angle microscopy”, J. Phys. Chem., pp. 4590 & 4592, 1991 American Chemical Society. |
| S. Henon et al. “Microscope at the Brewster angle: direct observation of first-order phase transitions in monolayers”, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 62, (4) pp. 936-939, Apr. 1991 American Institute of Physics. |
| Gang Jin et al. “A biosensor concept based on imaging ellipsometry for visualization of biomolecular interactions”, Analytical Biochemistry 232, pp. 69-72, 1995. |
| Pentti Tengvall et al. “Complement activation by 3-mercapto-1,2-propanediol immobilized on gold surfaces”, Biomaterials vol. 17, No. 10 pp. 1001-1007, 1995 Elsevier Science Ltd., Great Britain. |
| H. Arwin “Spectroscopic ellipsometry and biology: recent developments and challenges”, Thin Solid Films 313-314, pp. 7640774, 1998 Elsevier Science S.A. |
| Christopher Palmer “Diffraction Grating Handbook”, pp. 35-44, 2000 Richardson Grating Laboratory, Rochester, New York. |
| Erwin G. Loewen “Diffraction Gratings, Ruled and Holographic”, Applied Optics and Optical Engineering, vol. IX, pp. 33-71, Bausch and Lomb, Inc., Rochester, New York 1983 Academic Press, Inc. |
| Willems, Goerge M., et al., Adsorption and Conversion of Prothrombin on a Rotating Disc, Blood, Jul. 15, 1993, vol. 82, No. 2, pp. 497-504. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20110157693 A1 | Jun 2011 | US |