banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Review of microfluidic microbioreactor technology for high-throughput submerged microbiological cultivation
Rent this article for


Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

The process flow for the strain screening and evaluation with high throughput μBR positioned in the middle directly before scaling-up to the bioreactor.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Some of the complications that are facing scaling down process of bioreactors.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Schematic steps of microfabrication by soft lithography. (a) Using computer-aided design tool to draw photomasks, which then printed on transparency films. (b) Photoresist-coated silicon wafers are exposed through the photomask. (c) The photomask design is translated to the silicon surface. (d) The silicon then acts as a master mold for casting replicas of transparent PDMS polymer. (e) PDMS can be drilled to create inlets and outlets and bonded to a glass substrate to create closed microfluidic devices or (f) used to create stencils with micro-patterned through-holes. Reprinted with permission from M. L. Yarmush and K. R. King, Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 11, 235 (2009). Copyright 2009 Annual Reviews.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

The main chronological milestones of microfluidic cell bioreactors development. (a) Reprinted with permission from Zanzotto et al., Biotechnol. Bioeng. 87, 243 (2004). Copyright 2004 Wiley. (b) Reprinted with permission from Balagadde et al., Science 309, 137 (2005). Copyright 2005 The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (c) Reprinted with permission from Boccazzi et al., Biotechnol. Prog. 22, 710 (2006). Copyright 2006 Wiley. (d) Reprinted with permission from Steinhaus et al., Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73, 1653 (2007). Copyright 2007 American Society for Microbiology (ASM). (e) Reprinted with permission from Li et al., Chem. Eng. Sci. 63, 3036 (2008). Copyright 2008 Elsevier. (f) Reprinted with permission from Buchenauer et al., J. Micromech. Microeng. 19, 8 (2009). Copyright 2009 IOPscience. (g) Reprinted with permission from Schäpper et al., Chem. Eng. J. 160, 891 (2010). Copyright 2010 Elsevier. (h) Reprinted with permission from Holcomb et al., Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 400, 245 (2011). Copyright 2011 Springer. (i) Reprinted with permission from Seo et al., Process Biochem. 47, 1011 (2012). Copyright 2012 Elsevier.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Simulation result of the concentration profile of oscillation mixing in the reactor at different times: (a) t = 0 s, (b) t = 1 s, (c) t = 2 s, and (d) t = 4 s and with different pulling and pushing linear flow rates: (e) 0.005 m s−1, (f) 0.01 m s−1, (g) 0.02 m s−1, and (h) 0.06 m s−1. Reprinted with permission from Li et al., AIChE J. 55, 2725 (2009). Copyright 2009 Wiley. FEM simulation results of velocity fields around the piezoelectric transducer array and the culture chamber of models: (i) D100 and (j) D50, and arrows indicate the flow direction. Reprinted with permission from Y.-H. Hsu and W. Tang, Microfluid. Nanofluid. 11, 459 (2011). Copyright 2011 Springer.


Generic image for table
Table I.

Fabricated μBRs devices and their main characteristics.


Article metrics loading...


Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Review of microfluidic microbioreactor technology for high-throughput submerged microbiological cultivation