Picking the best microplate for growing organoids often includes some personal preference
Most life scientists use some sort of microplate, and probably for more than one application
Using a process that includes a handler makes the results easier to collect as well as more accurate and repeatable
The transfer of standard “test tube” chemical, biochemical, and live-cell assays to microplate formats boosted scientists’ ability to run large-scale, replicative experiments in many different formats
For cell-based assays, the imaging perspective can make a big difference in the results.
With the range of options available, most scientists can find something that fits many—if not all—of their needs in automating immunoassays.
The number and types of cell-based assays (CBAs) are as diverse as a cell’s observable biochemical activity.
Cell-based assays have become the go-to technology for pharmaceutical, environmental, and toxicology labs. Cells are far less costly to maintain than test animals and don’t involve the ethical considerations. But the complexity of cell-based assays compared with chemical or biochemical assays presents distinct challenges to laboratory managers.
Life scientists started using microplates in the 1950s, with some of the first ones literally machined from solid blocks of plastic. You don’t need to wander around a molecular biology lab long today to see the progress in microplates, some now including thousands of wells.
Microplate handlers are the robotic “glue” that unifies operations around a microplate workflow. The
evolution of robotics and software has caused a “democratization” of lab automation in general, and microplate handlers in particular.