David Beebe

David Beebe


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

29Years (1998-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
4 October 2006 in Lab on a Chip
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MTMichael W. Toepke
Michael W. Toepke
DBDavid Beebe
David Beebe
Microfluidic devices made out of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) have many physical properties that are useful for cell culture applications, such as transparency and gas permeability. Another distinct characteristic of PDMS is its ability to absorb hydrophobic small molecules. Partitioning of molecules into PDMS can significantly change solution concentrations and could potentially alter experimental outcomes. Herein we discuss PDMS absorption and its potential impact on microfluidic experiments.

8 February 2012 in Lab on a Chip
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
EBErwin Berthier
Erwin Berthier
EYEdmond W. K. Young
Edmond W. K. Young
DBDavid Beebe
David Beebe
As the integration of microfluidics into cell biology research proceeds at an ever-increasing pace, a critical question for those working at the interface of both disciplines is which device material to use for a given application. While PDMS and soft lithography methods offer the engineer rapid prototyping capabilities, PDMS as a material has characteristics that have known adverse effects on cell-based experiments. In contrast, while polystyrene (PS), the most commonly used thermoplastic for laboratory cultureware, has provided decades of grounded and validated research conclusions in cell behavior and function, PS as a material has posed significant challenges in microfabrication. These competing issues have forced microfluidics engineers and biologists to make compromises in how they approach specific research questions, and furthermore, have attenuated the impact of microfluidics on biological research. In this review, we provide a comparison of the attributes of PDMS and PS, and discuss reasons for their popularity in their respective fields. We provide a critical evaluation of the strengths and limitations of PDMS and PS in relation to the advancement and future impact on microfluidic cell-based studies and applications. We believe that engineers have a responsibility to overcome any challenges associated with microfabrication, whether with PS or other materials, and that engineers should provide options and solutions that assist biologists in their experimental design. Our goal is not to advocate for any specific material, but provide guidelines for researchers who desire to choose the most suitable material for their application, and suggest important research directions for engineers working at the interface between microfabrication technology and biological application.

1 February 2010 in Chemical Society Reviews
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
EYEdmond W. K. Young
Edmond W. K. Young
DBDavid Beebe
David Beebe
Microfluidics has the potential to revolutionize the way we approach cell biology research. The dimensions of microfluidic channels are well suited to the physical scale of biological cells, and the many advantages of microfluidics make it an attractive platform for new techniques in biology. One of the key benefits of microfluidics for basic biology is the ability to control parameters of the cell microenvironment at relevant length and time scales. Considerable progress has been made in the design and use of novel microfluidic devices for culturing cells and for subsequent treatment and analysis. With the recent pace of scientific discovery, it is becoming increasingly important to evaluate existing tools and techniques, and to synthesize fundamental concepts that would further improve the efficiency of biological research at the microscale. This tutorial review integrates fundamental principles from cell biology and local microenvironments with cell culture techniques and concepts in microfluidics. Culturing cells in microscale environments requires knowledge of multiple disciplines including physics, biochemistry, and engineering. We discuss basic concepts related to the physical and biochemical microenvironments of the cell, physicochemical properties of that microenvironment, cell culture techniques, and practical knowledge of microfluidic device design and operation. We also discuss the most recent advances in microfluidic cell culture and their implications on the future of the field. The goal is to guide new and interested researchers to the important areas and challenges facing the scientific community as we strive toward full integration of microfluidics with biology.

1 July 2008 in Annual Review of Analytical Chemistry
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
IMIvar Meyvantsson
Ivar Meyvantsson
DBDavid Beebe
David Beebe
Microfluidic technology holds great promise for the creation of advanced cell culture models. In this review, we discuss the characterization of cell culture in microfluidic systems, describe important biochemical and physical features of the cell microenvironment, and review studies of microfluidic cell manipulation in the context of these features. Finally, we consider the integration of analytical elements, ways to achieve high throughput, and the design constraints imposed by cell biology applications.

19 October 2006 in Lab on a Chip
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
KHKathryn Haubert
Kathryn Haubert
TDTracy Drier
Tracy Drier
DBDavid Beebe
David Beebe
A hand-held corona treater is presented as an effective, inexpensive, and portable alternative for irreversible bonding of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) to glass.

1 February 2013 in Biomaterials
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LBLauren L. Bischel
Lauren L. Bischel
EYEdmond W.K. Young
Edmond W.K. Young
BMBrianah R. Mader
Brianah R. Mader
DBDavid Beebe
David Beebe