noncontact microarray printer  (SCIENION)

Journal: iScience

Article Title: A rapid point-of-care test for vancomycin monitoring at the clinical bedside

doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2026.116064

Figure Lengend Snippet: The VANC-D4 assay (A) Fabrication of the VANC-D4 assay. SI-ATRP is used to grow POEGMA-co-GMA brushes on glass slides. Following SI-ATRP, VANC-BSA is inkjet printed into the polymer brush to create stable spots and fluorescently labeled anti-VANC antibodies (termed dAb) are printed on trehalose pads to create labile spots. (B) Sequential steps of the VANC-D4 assay. The steps of the VANC-D4 are (i) dispensing a blood sample on the surface, (ii) dissolution of the trehalose pads to release the fluorescently labeled dAb into solution, (iii) diffusion of the labeled dAb in the sample volume, (iv) detection of fluorescence signal from the antibody bound to immobilized VANC-BSA. (C) Representative VANC-D4 assay response in the presence of (i) no drug, (ii) low drug, and (iii) high drug concentration. (D) VANC monitoring across its clinical range using VANC-spiked whole blood diluted 100-fold in running buffer, analyzed in triplicate. The clinical range for the test is 1–45 μg/mL. Intensity values are shown, with error bars that represent the standard error of the means for n = 3 separate runs. The LOD for the presented dose-response curve was calculated to be 0.8 μg/mL.

Article Snippet: Following polymerization, D4 assays were fabricated using non-contact inkjet printing methods as described elsewhere., VANC-BSA was printed using a non-contact inkjet microarray printer (Scienion, sciFLEXARRAYER Type S12).

Techniques: Polymer, Labeling, Dissolution, Diffusion-based Assay, Fluorescence, Concentration Assay

Journal: Plant Direct

Article Title: Arabinokinase Limits the Flux of Arabinose Into Nucleotide Sugars to Prevent Toxicity

doi: 10.1002/pld3.70094

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comprehensive microarray polymer profiling (CoMPP) from Arabidopsis thaliana wild type and ARAK1‐OE seedlings grown on 3 mM L‐Ara. Analysis of cell wall composition by carbohydrate profiling is shown. Alcohol‐insoluble residue (AIR) samples were isolated from roots of wild type (WT) and ARAK1‐OE mutants growing for 14 days on 0.5× MS‐agar plates supplemented with 3 mM L‐Ara. Cell wall components were extracted from AIR samples with diaminocyclo‐hexane‐tetra‐acetic acid (CDTA) and NaOH. Blue colors indicate increased intensity of respective antibody binding according to the legend.

Article Snippet: Arrays were printed as distinct dots onto nitrocellulose membranes with an ArrayJet Sprint microarray printer (ArrayJet, Roslin, UK) and probed with ~40 cell wall probes, including antibodies and carbohydrate binding modules (Table ).

Techniques: Microarray, Polymer, Residue, Isolation, Binding Assay

Journal: Journal of Neuroinflammation

Article Title: Targeting glial fibrillary acidic protein in glaucoma: a monoclonal antibody approach to modulate glial reactivity and neuroinflammation for neuroprotection

doi: 10.1186/s12974-025-03482-8

Figure Lengend Snippet: Microarray analysis reveals the effects of GFAP mAb treatment on key inflammatory mediators in glaucomatous retina. ( A - C ) The expression of TLR4 and S100A8 was significantly downregulated by 25–50 µg GFAP mAb treatment compared to the vehicle. The marker for microglial activation, CD68, was significantly decreased in the 25 µg GFAP mAb treatment group. ( D - F ) Proteins of the inflammasome pathway, NLRP3, GSDMD and Caspase-1 were significantly downregulated in the 25 µg GFAP mAb treatment group. With the 50 µg dose, these protein expressions showed a similar downward trend, but without statistical significance. ( G ) Expression profiling of inflammation-associated mediators showed that 25 µg GFAP mAb significantly decreased pro-inflammatory factors (TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-8, MMP9, and IFN-γ), and increased the anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 compared to the vehicle group. In contrast, the 50 µg dose significantly reduced IFN-γ only. ( H ) Representative images of spots showing IL-1β levels in the subarrays for each group. Image analysis was conducted with Imagene software, using the median intensity from each spot to calculate the mean of the triplicate spots for each marker. For CD68 and TLR4, due to significant heterogeneity in SDs, statistical analysis was performed using Welch’s ANOVA followed by the Tamhane T2 post hoc test. All other data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc test. Data are presented as the mean ± SD; n = 4 per group; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001; ns = not significant. TLR4 – Toll-Like Receptor 4. S100A8 – S100 Calcium Binding Protein A8. NLRP3 – NLR Family Pyrin Domain Containing 3. GSDMD – Gasdermin D

Article Snippet: Briefly, the microarray was prepared using a noncontact microarray printer (SciFLEXARRAYER S3; Scienion, Berlin, Germany).

Techniques: Microarray, Expressing, Marker, Activation Assay, Software, Binding Assay