$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Microfluidic device design rationale
The design of the microfluidic device in this study was guided by several key features (Figure 2), which build and improve upon the traditional simple flow-cell design. Of note, the microfluidic device has an internal volume of ~160 nL, significantly smaller than the ~10 µL volume of more traditional flow cells47, allowing for a more controlled use of potentially precious reagents, such as purified protein components. Because the microfluidic flow controller contains two regulating channels, the device was developed assuming that only two inlet/outlet ports would have pressure control at any given time. More pressure-controlled channels can be implemented, if desired.

Figure 2: Schematic of the microfluidic device design. Rectangular markings on the periphery are for visual aid in seeing the periphery of the channels. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
The central, rectangular device chamber serves as the main imaging area where microtubule seeds are attached, and microtubule extensions are polymerized off of these seeds. The chamber is intersected by a flow channel on each side, with straight channels along the x-axis serving as an inlet and outlet to facilitate rapid exchange of the reaction solution. Microtubule inlet channel is also used to introduce microtubule seeds into the chamber, with laminar flow resulting in the seed binding to the glass surface along the direction of flow. In the perpendicular (y-axis) direction, the flow channels branch into smaller channels towards the chamber, similar to some of the previous designs25,28,36,39. The branching geometry is particularly suitable for studying the mechanical properties of microtubules. Flowing a solution into the central chamber from a direction perpendicular to the orientation of the microtubule seeds allows for flow-induced bending forces at near-normal angles. Furthermore, the inclusion of branching geometry with many smaller flow channels facilitates a more homogeneous force application over a wide area of the central chamber, which is not achieved by a simple single-channel flow geometry. In this way, the branching motif, while seemingly more complicated, can reduce overall complexity in determining the force imparted to microtubules (Figure 3). This design also features multiple lines of symmetry, allowing for ease of use and the opportunity to evaluate bending from several directions (e.g., top vs. bottom).

Figure 3: Inclusion of a branching motif results in a large area of similar flow. Simulations of two device designs under steady-state flow: one without branching channels (A) and one with branching channels (B). Arrows denote local flow direction and are proportional to flow magnitude. Surface coloration denotes centerline velocity. Images on the right show zoomed-in section of the device where microtubules (not shown) oriented along the x-axis would be subject to bending forces from a fluid flowing in the top port and out the bottom port. Incorporating branching channels increases the relative area subject to similar velocity fields while not increasing the volume of reagent required. This figure has been modified with permission from Rogers (2022)14. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Notably, the device also implements a series of bubble traps in the inlet and outlet flow channels to prevent air bubbles from entering the central imaging chamber. Specifically, we chose to include arrays of micropillars within the flow path in order to block air bubbles from traveling past due to surface tension (Figure 2)46. Furthermore, to prevent air entrainment, we designed the edges inside the device as smooth curves, as opposed to having oblique angles. Taken together, these design features reduce the possibility of air bubbles and increase the robustness of the device.
Microfluidic device fabrication
Determining the proper parameters for creating the device master required some optimization. As previously observed, this photoresist is very sensitive to key operating parameters such as ambient lighting and the rates of heating and cooling during the photolithography steps50. For example, if the master was cooled too quickly after heating, thermal cracks could develop in the photoresist. This is undesirable, as the cracks can compromise channel integrity. While cracks could be resolved by re-heating the resist to a temperature near its transition temperature (~115 ˚C), we found that allowing the master to ambiently cool on the hot plate was the most robust way of preventing cracking. Furthermore, excess ambient light can result in unintended exposure of the photoresist, weakening the resist and resulting in the device features themselves (which should remain on the wafer after development) undergoing partial stripping away during the development step. For this reason, we encourage the development step to be performed the day after the post-exposure baking and ambient overnight cooling steps. Moreover, whenever the device master is not in use, we recommend storing it in a dark area or wrapped in aluminum foil to prevent degradation over time. Once these parameters were determined, the photolithography process was highly repeatable (Figure 4).
After the master was created, liquid PDMS was cast on top of the master, allowing the PDMS to cure and create a negative imprint of the master's features. We found that casting the PDMS at a thickness of 2-3 mm allowed for easy manipulation of the devices; in contrast, if spin-coated to achieve a thickness in the µm range, the PDMS was prone to tearing or self-adhering, making manipulation difficult. Furthermore, a thicker PDMS layer allows for easier plugging in of tubing, as the tubing will remain in the inlet/outlet ports without the need for a sealant or clamp.
Finally, while traditional flow-cell assays for these biological applications often use glass coverslips that have been pre-cleaned using a Piranha solution (hydrogen peroxide and sulfuric acid) and then silanized, we found that coverslips treated with an extended plasma clean and IPA wash were suitable for our purposes47. Other applications, such as single-molecule imaging, may require a more extensive cover glass treatment.

Figure 4: Photolithography process. (A) The mask with the desired design (mask made from chromium etched on glass). (B) Slight cracking of photoresist on the silicon wafer due to thermal stress (arrows highlight a few cracks). These cracks often stretch across the entire wafer. (C) The developed master. (D) The microfluidic setup on the microscope. Individual components are labeled in green. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Microtubule growth, stabilization, and bending
GMPCPP-grown microtubule seeds serve as nucleation sites for microtubule extensions to polymerize and are themselves stable against depolymerization for several hours at room temperature. The seeds were bound to the glass coverslip in the microfluidic channel using an anti-rhodamine antibody47. Dynamic microtubule extensions were then grown in the presence of soluble tubulin (fluorescently labeled but not rhodamine-conjugated) and GTP. In this way, the seed nucleation sites were attached to the glass coverslip, but the extensions were not. During the 15-min extension growth period, microtubule extensions polymerized and depolymerized stochastically, as expected due to their intrinsic dynamic instability49. Following this growth period, a 10 µM Taxol washout was carried out to eliminate any remaining tubulin from the solution and stabilize the microtubule extensions that had formed. The stabilization is key, as the microtubule extensions would otherwise depolymerize upon tubulin depletion. In addition to binding and stabilizing microtubule polymer, Taxol has also been demonstrated to impact microtubule polymer mechanics and may induce curvature in the otherwise linear microtubule extensions51,52,53,54. The results shown here reflected these observations; however, the curling of the microtubule extensions is undesirable, as this results in uneven forces imparted along the lattice during bending. Therefore, only microtubules that remained relatively straight after stabilization were used for bending analysis. Alternatively, after the initial growth period, a secondary growth period with a solution of tubulin and GMPCPP (as opposed to the initial GTP) can be used to create stable 'caps' on the growing ends of the microtubule lattice and prevent depolymerization55.
Microtubules were then bent by flowing in the buffer solution using the pressure control system to maintain a constant upstream pressure (Figure 5, Supplementary Video 1). In this way, we could approximate the local flow experienced by the microtubules. By flowing fluid in from the top and out of the bottom device port, the orientation of the flow was intended to be perpendicular to the seeding orientation.

Figure 5: The microfluidic setup can be used to bend stabilized microtubules. Microtubules in a resting state after stabilization with paclitaxel are bent during pulsatile flow. A constant upstream pressure of 30 mbar drives flow (arrow denotes direction of flow). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Determination of flow profile in the microfluidic device
The centerline velocity in the microfluidic can be computationally simulated using COMSOL software (simulation software, Figure 6A). However, the microtubules are attached to the glass coverslip for TIRF microscopy within ~100 nm of the surface. Therefore, the velocity experienced by the microtubule is not the same as that predicted in the 2D simulation. To approximate the local flow experienced by the microtubules, we used the general Navier-Stokes equation for an incompressible fluid flow in one dimension:

Here, z is the height of the microtubules in the device, h is the overall height of the device, and vc is the centerline velocity in the device. By definition of the system, the z-origin is the center of the device (Figure 6B). Using this definition and a channel height of 13 µm, the height of the microtubules is approximated as z = -6.4 µm. Solving this equation yields an estimate for the local fluid velocity experienced by the microtubules:


Figure 6: Defining the system for fluid flow analysis of fluid entering the device at the top port and exiting at the bottom port (ports not shown). (A) Simulation of scaled centerline velocity field as in Figure 3B. Star denotes the area of interest for panel B. (B) Cross-sectional representation of the device. Fully developed fluid flow profile is in the y-direction with a centerline velocity vc at z = 0 and a no-slip boundary condition at the walls. Note that the arrows in this panel are not to scale with respect to the actual velocity field shown in panel A. This figure has been modified with permission from Rogers (2022)14. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Beyond simulations, fluid velocity can be controlled using a flow controller based on a volumetric flow rate rather than maintaining pressure. Furthermore, the local flow rate in each device can be directly determined by including fluorescent beads and monitoring their velocity, thus alleviating any sample-to-sample variability.
Computational modeling and gradient demonstrations
Finally, we performed computational simulations in combination with experiments to demonstrate the feasibility of using this device for high-throughput experiments. Along with the ability to bend microtubules in multiple directions thanks to the device's symmetry, the simulations showed that the device can maintain precise gradients, enabling the simultaneous investigation of multiple experimental conditions (Figure 7A). Preliminary experiments (methods not explicitly stated as part of this publication) using fluorescent dye in solution demonstrated consistency with the computational predictions (Figure 7B). Furthermore, we successfully demonstrated the partitioning of different proteins in different areas of the device by simultaneously growing microtubule extensions with different fluorescent labels (Figure 8). To our knowledge, this is the first application of high-throughput microfluidics to microtubule investigations. This feature of this device can be used to reduce the time and quantities of needed reagents while also improving experimental robustness. For example, the effects of different proteins or distinct concentrations of individual proteins on microtubule mechanics and dynamics can be simultaneously investigated simultaneously in a single device.

Figure 7: Gradient formation. (A) Simulation of a gradient of two solutions entering the device at the same inlet pressure (50 mbar) and concentration (15 µM). Inlet ports for each solution are denoted with colored arrows (one solution in the top port and another solution in the right port), and the two remaining ports serve as outlets. Heatmap shows the concentration profile of the top solution. Steady state was achieved at t = 5 s. (B) Experimental generation of a similar gradient using fluorescent dye in solution in the top port and buffer in the right port. Image is a raster layer made by stitching each field of view (80 µm × 80 µm) to resolve the entire device area. This figure has been modified with permission from Rogers (2022)14. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 8: Demonstrating a protein gradient in the microfluidic device. AlexaFluor647 labeled tubulin (magenta) was flown in inlet 1, and AlexaFluor488 labeled tubulin (green) was flown in inlet 2 of the device at equal concentrations and flow rates. Flow was oscillated on/off in 90 s increments to allow for tubulin polymerization from stabilized-GMPCPP seeds (red) while inhibiting mixing. (A) Large-scale raster layer made by stitching fields of view (80x80 µm) to resolve the entire length of the device. Letters designate the relative location of individual fields of view in subsequent panels. Scale bar is 50 µm in X and Y-position. (B) Field of view near inlet 1 of the device, where extensions are comprised predominately of A647-labeled tubulin. (C) Field of view near the middle of the device, where extensions are comprised of a mixture of labeled tubulins, as predicted. (D) Field of view near the bottom of the device, where extensions are comprised predominately of A488-labeled tubulin. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
A process flow diagram (PFD) for the microfluidics experimental setup on a microscope is shown in Supplementary Figure 1.
Supplementary Figure 1: A process flow diagram (PFD) for the microfluidics experimental setup on a microscope. Please click here to download this File.
Supplementary Video 1. The microfluidic setup can be used to bend stabilized microtubules. Microtubules in a resting state after stabilization with paclitaxel are bent during pulsatile flow. A constant upstream pressure of 30 mbar drives flow. Video playback rate 10 fps. Please click here to download this File.
Supplementary File 1: A CAD file of the microfluidic mask design. Please click here to download this File.