Sample Preparation
IndustriesOther
ManufacturerAgilent Technologies
Significance of the Topic
Automated liquid handling accelerates sample processing while maintaining high accuracy and precision, reducing manual errors and improving reproducibility in laboratory workflows.
Objectives and Study Overview
This study evaluates the performance of the Agilent Bravo Automated Liquid Handling Platform equipped with a 96-channel large transfer tip head at dispensing volumes ranging from 2 to 10 µL, focusing on accuracy and precision metrics.
Methodology and Instrumentation
Precision and accuracy were assessed by dispensing tartrazine in DMSO into dry microplates, diluting with water, and measuring absorbance at 405 nm. Key instrumentation included
- Agilent Bravo with 96-channel LT disposable 250 µL tip head
- Agilent 96LT 250 µL tips
- 96-well manual fill reservoir
- 384-well polystyrene microplates
- UV/Vis spectrophotometer with 405 nm filter
Results and Discussion
Main findings for the 96LT head at low-volume dispensing:
- 2 µL: 2.1% CV and ±3.3% accuracy, with 6% outliers at the 5% threshold
- 5 µL: 1.1% CV and ±0.3% accuracy, no outliers
- 10 µL: 1.0% CV and ±4.2% accuracy, no outliers
- Volumes above 10 µL met or exceeded the 10 µL performance metrics
Benefits and Practical Applications
The Agilent Bravo platform enables high-throughput, automated dispensing across a wide volume range with a single tip head, supporting applications such as compound transfers, genomic assays, and cell-based experiments while minimizing manual intervention and error rates.
Future Trends and Applications
Advancements may include integration with real-time quality control sensors, expanded liquid class libraries for diverse reagent types, and enhanced software-driven optimization to further reduce cycle times and broaden applicability in pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and clinical laboratories.
Conclusion
The 96-channel LT head on the Agilent Bravo Platform delivers reliable and precise low-volume dispensing, meeting stringent accuracy and precision criteria, thus offering a robust solution for automating varied laboratory protocols.
References
- J. W. Holman, T. E. Mifflin, R. A. Felder, L. M. Demers, Evaluation of an automated preanalytical robotic workstation at two academic health centers, Clin. Chem. 48:540-548, 2002.
Content was automatically generated from an orignal PDF document using AI and may contain inaccuracies.