Virtually every lab manager experiences the dominant pressures of optimized workflows that reduce inefficiencies on all fronts to achieve organizational goals and remain competitive in the dynamic scientific landscape. Adopting automation technologies—and automated liquid handling (ALH) in particular—promise to enhance lab efficiency, throughput, and reliability, enabling labs to meet goals faster and more easily. Many labs have yet to adopt these technologies, for a variety of reasons including cost, lack of expertise, and the difficulty in assessing the best options for their lab and the most relevant considerations amidst incredibly wide-ranging technologies on the market.
Successful ALH integration requires thoughtful consideration beyond the initial investment. The primary considerations for ALH adoption include evaluating the entire workflow to understand how automation affects both upstream and downstream processes, ensuring compatibility and integrity of samples within automated systems, and effectively managing the transition to accommodate staffing and data processing needs.
A comprehensive evaluation of your lab’s specific needs, sample variability, and mission is crucial. Whether you’re focused on quality control, research support, or method development, understanding the variability of your sample streams and ensuring sample suitability for automated environments are key to maintaining quality. Additionally, careful planning to streamline sample preparation and queue management can prevent the creation of new bottlenecks and enhance overall lab productivity. Successful decision-making relating to automation can be achieved by ensuring procedures, processes, and benefits are fully broken down and assessed separately, making sure that each member of staff involved has given some input into the pros and cons of automating the process.
Assessing the relevant long-term benefits and costs for specific labs and applications can be challenging, but understanding the balance between them is central to informed decision making surrounding adoption. While automation can significantly increase sample throughput and operational efficiency, it’s essential to consider the full scope of automation’s impact, including potential shifts in bottlenecks and the need for adjustments in staffing and data management strategies. Solutions must also be adaptable to future needs for long-term success, ideally capable of integration with future equipment or attachments and scale-up ready. By taking a holistic approach to planning and implementation, lab managers can ensure that ALH adoption meets current needs and positions the lab for future growth and challenges.
Download this comprehensive guide to learn:
- Key considerations and strategies for successfully integrating ALH systems into your laboratory workflow.
- How to evaluate and address the impact of automation on sample integrity, throughput, and quality control.
- Practical insights into overcoming common challenges, including staffing adjustments and data management in an automated setting.
- Insights into the balance between cost and functionality, emphasizing the importance of flexibility, scalability, and strategic investment in automation for long-term benefits.
LM_ALH_eBook_Final
AUTOMATED LIQUID HANDLING RESOURCE GUIDE
Transitioning to Automated Liquid Handling
A guide to the logistical and economic considerations of adopting new platforms in the lab
TIPS
for implementation
COST/BENEFIT
analyses
HOW TO
meet industry demands
Table of Contents
4 The Economic Realities of Lab Automation
8 Evaluating Automated Liquid Handling Solutions
11 Simplifying Lab Tasks with Automated Liquid Handling
2 Lab Manager
14 Meeting Industry Demands Through Automation
Introduction
Finding the Path to Successful Adoption of Automated Liquid Handling
Virtually every lab manager experiences the dominant pressures of optimized workflows that reduce inefficiencies on all fronts to achieve organizational goals and remain competitive in the dynamic scientific landscape. Adopting automation technologies—and automated liquid handling (ALH) in particular—promise to enhance lab efficiency, throughput, and reliabil- ity, enabling labs to meet goals faster and more easily. Many labs have yet to adopt these technologies, for a variety of reasons including cost, lack of expertise, and the difficulty in assessing the best options for their lab and the most relevant considerations amidst incredibly wide-ranging technologies on the market.
Successful ALH integration requires thoughtful consideration beyond the initial investment. The primary considerations for ALH adoption include evaluating the entire workflow to understand how automation affects both upstream and downstream processes, ensuring com- patibility and integrity of samples within automated systems, and effectively managing the transition to accommodate staffing and data processing needs.
A comprehensive evaluation of your lab’s specific needs, sample variability, and mission is crucial. Whether you’re focused on quality control, research support, or method develop- ment, understanding the variability of your sample streams and ensuring sample suitability
Introduction
for automated environments are key to maintaining quality. Additionally, careful planning to streamline sample preparation and queue management can prevent the creation of new bottlenecks and enhance overall lab productivity. Successful decision-making relating to automation can be achieved by ensuring procedures, processes, and benefits are fully broken
down and assessed separately, making sure that each member of staff involved has given some input into the pros and cons of automating the process.
Assessing the relevant long-term benefits and costs for specific labs and applications can be challenging, but understanding the balance between them is central to informed decision making surrounding adoption. While automation can significantly increase sample through- put and operational efficiency, it’s essential to consider the full scope of automation’s impact, including potential shifts in bottlenecks and the need for adjustments in staffing and data management strategies. Solutions must also be adaptable to future needs for long-term suc- cess, ideally capable of integration with future equipment or attachments and scale-up ready. By taking a holistic approach to planning and implementation, lab managers can ensure that ALH adoption meets current needs and positions the lab for future growth and challenges.
This resource guide blends expert insights and practical strategies to equip lab managers with the knowledge and confidence to make informed decisions on ALH adoption, ensuring a future-proof, efficient, and high-quality laboratory environment. It details considerations from evaluating entire workflows to ensuring sample compatibility and adjusting staffing strategies with in-depth discussion on sample integrity in automated environments, data management post-automation, and strategic investment and the balance between cost and functionality to ensure for long-term success.
The Economic Realities of Lab Automation
Successful implementation will rely on standards development, education, and careful planning
by Joe Liscouski, MS
Take a look around your laboratory. Now imagine it without any automated equipment. What would your productivity be like in a facility where all the work was done manually, without the benefits of any automation?
) The recording spectrophotometer is an example of automation. The non-automated process requires manu- ally selecting the wavelength, reading dark currents, reading the intensity with and without the sample present, and repeating as needed.
) The strip chart on your chromatograph is an automat- ed recording of detector output, as is the data system that captures and processes analytical data. How productive would your lab be if peak parameters were measured by hand from charts?
) No hyphenated techniques, liquid-handling systems, high-throughput screening, microplate-based assay techniques, or automated sample preparation would be available without automation.
) Your lab would be back to double-pan balances for weighing. There is a long list of automated equipment that we take for granted.
) What samples need to be worked on? … Flip through the sample log book.
The introduction of automated instrumentation, equipment, and software has had a major impact on a lab’s ability to car- ry out work, whether in an analytical testing lab, a materials lab, or a lab focused on primary research. Automation in the form of web applications has sped up the process of placing orders, searching, finding products and contact information, and so on. We wouldn’t want to go back to ordering products by phone with endless phone menus and holding.
Automated equipment has provided an economic benefit to lab operations, but many of us have just scratched the sur- face. The real benefits, both economic and functional, will come when we change our thinking about how to plan for, choose, and apply the technologies.
Clinical laboratories have a lot in common with testing and analytical labs in other industries. Samples are submitted, tests are scheduled, the analysis is performed, and the results are reported. There are three major differences. The first is that their samples are drawn from us in the form of fluids, tis-
sues, etc., that are evaluated according to standardized meth- ods. Secondly, their charge rates are set by contract or the federal government and they have to operate within that limit. The third point we get to later. The bottom line is this: Prop- erly done, automation works in the laboratory environment.
“Properly done” is the key element. In the clinical laboratory industry, the needed work was done to establish a framework for communication that allowed systems, including instru- ment-data-to-laboratory-information systems, to exchange information. That standard “glue” holds things together and makes them work; that is the third key difference between the clinical lab environment and the environments we commonly encounter in analytical, testing, pharmaceutical, biotech, materials characterization, and other labs.
If you’d like more evidence, look at the ease of micro- plate-based assays. Samples are processed and read using a variety of devices from a mix of vendors that work on a standardized sample format.
And for the rest of us…
For those not working in a clinical lab setting, how does this apply? The work on clinical laboratory and hospital infor- mation standards goes back to 1987 with the initiation of the HL7 program (www.HL7.org), which continues its work
today. In addition, three ASTM standards were designed for clinical laboratories:
) ASTM E1238 – Standard Specification for Transferring Clinical Observations Between Independent Com- puter Systems
) ASTM E1381 – Specification for Low-Level Protocol to Transfer Messages Between Clinical Laboratory Instru- ments and Computer Systems
) ASTM E1394 – Standard Specification for Transferring Information Between Clinical Instruments and Com- puter Systems
These ASTM standards provided the initial basis for stan- dardizing instrument-to-LIS communication.” (Note: Clin- ical labs use LIS where industrial labs tend to use LIMS.) The successful implementation of lab automation in clinical labs provides a model for what could be done in your lab (the ASTM 1394 standard carries the note that it “does not necessarily apply to general analytical instruments in an in-
dustrial analytical or R&D setting.”) These ASTM standards have been replaced with work by the Clinical Standards and Laboratory Institute (CSLI - www.clsi.org) in the form of the “Laboratory Automation: Communications with Automated Clinical Laboratory Systems, Instruments, Devices, and Information Systems” electronic document. This approved standard is in its second edition. From this author’s point of
“Laboratory economics is not just about saving money. It is about the efficient and effective use of resources.”
view, the structure of the standards is an appropriate model,
although the specific language and terminology will differ.
Three issues have to be addressed:
) Standards development
) Education
) Planning for automation
Standards Development
First, we’ll look at the long-term consideration of standards development. If we are going to bring the maturity to lab automation necessary to allow products to exchange in- formation without the need for custom coding, we have to move toward standards, and we must do so rapidly. Since the operational structure of clinical labs is similar to those of other testing and analytical labs, it may be possible to jump- start a standards development program by building on the HL7 and ASTM / CSLI work; this should be explored, and those interested in pursuing this should contact the author. Developing a similar standards program would dramatically improve the economics of lab automation.
The alternative is to continue developing programs that may forge a connection between an instrument or data system and a LIMS or Electronic Laboratory Notebook (ELN) that works, possibly at considerable expense, but ties you not only to a specific product but to a specific version of that product as well, since upgrades may obviate that work and require that it be re-implemented. While the idea of instru-
ment-to-LIMS/ELN communication is nice, doing it outside the facilities provided by the vendor (vendor-supported in- strument interfaces) is both risky, in terms of project failure, and expensive.
Education
Education is a major differentiator between successful lab automation programs and those that fail. Education includes
user-level material (working with lab automation systems, what does a LIMS/ELN do, etc.) as well as management-lev- el material that looks at how to plan for automation, imple- mentation considerations (including project management), product life cycle management and its impact, regulatory issues, and so on.
The cost of projects can be severely impacted by failing to fully understand the ramifications of decisions such as
linking instruments to LIMS/ELNs outside the capabilities provided by the vendor, by not properly defining the scope of a project or missing key requirements, and by not fully evaluating the range of technology options. For example, in the LIMS/ELN environment, implementations can be the
traditional system on site or perhaps the increasingly popular software-as-a-service model in which the application is run on external equipment. Both implementations are viable options, but corporate considerations may make one more appropriate than the other.
If we use the clinical environment as a potential model for what an automated lab can be, then we need to look at how it changed the nature of lab work, and how that change could be reflected in your lab. Much of laboratory work consists
of carrying out tests and experiments. In a fully automated lab—including a research lab—much of that effort will be done by systems. We can see elements of this today in fully automated microplate-based assays. The tasks will change from manually conducting the work to planning work to be done, making sure systems are performing properly, doing data analysis, and doing what laboratory people do best: thinking, developing, and being innovative. This was the promise held out all along by lab-automation advocates.
An investment in education will pay for itself many times over in more effective lab personnel, better planned pro- grams, improvements in lab operations, and better science.
Planning for Automation
There are several ways of approaching lab automation. One is the gradual introduction of automated equipment into the lab, replacing manual tasks, such as liquid handling,
with more-efficient automated components. This equipment can speed up aspects of lab work, but people still make the process work.
Another is to make a commitment to automation and re- evaluate the procedures you are using: Are they suitable for automation? Are there steps in the procedure that, due to
materials handling or the nature of the processing, prevent the use of automation, and if so, are there alternative meth- ods that may lend themselves to automated systems? Within your industry, is it possible for several companies to evaluate and standardize procedures for automation (this is a role that ASTM fills for some applications)? This latter point is one
of the elements that has led to automation successes in the clinical lab and can guide your own developments.
Laboratory economics is not just about saving money. It is about the efficient and effective use of resources, especially those working in the lab.
Product Spotlight
epMotion® Automated Liquid Handler
In 1961, Eppendorf’s piston-stroke pipette transformed liquid handling, revolutionizing scientific practices. This innovation, along with multichannel pipettes and automation, greatly improved the efficiency of liquid transfers. Automation not only offers the benefit of speed, but also ensures consistent and accurate results while minimizing errors and contamination risks.
With its user-friendly interface and intuitive design, the epMotion® makes the adoption of automation effortless. From routine tasks like serial dilutions and normalization to more complex workflows
such as NGS library preparation, the epMotion provides solutions tailored to meet your lab’s unique needs. Plus, you can count on us to guide you every step of the way throughout your automation journey.
Evaluating Automated Liquid Handling Solutions
Liquid handling systems should be adaptable to future needs and their maintenance should be transparent and straightforward
by Brandoch Cook, PhD
A liquid handling system is often the centerpiece of labo- ratory automation. This can be the case for drug discovery and validation in big pharma companies, infectious disease detection in clinical labs, fulfillment of chemical screen- ing and next-generation sequencing (NGS) workflows in university core facilities, and big-data-driven experiments
requiring many samples and replicates in individual research laboratories. Although vastly different environments with
disparate concerns and goals, the through-line is that del- egation of a subset of laboratory tasks to a robotic platform imparts both efficiency and reproducibility not achievable by human hands.
For instance, think about yourself or your laboratory person- nel performing comparatively menial tasks such as nucleic acid extraction and purification. Often, optimizing these
workflows dictates coordinating sample numbers with the capacity of a laboratory centrifuge. As you have discovered the hard way, the time to complete a round of extraction builds exponentially rather than linearly when you have 24 or 48 samples to wash, aspirate, and spin down repeatedly. Additionally, the magnified possibility of a single labeling or transfer error extending throughout the whole procedure can be exceedingly difficult to track backward and identify.
Now, think about designing and executing large-scale ex- periments to generate complicated data sets, using precious reagents such as antibodies or recombinant proteins. An unidentified manual error can have a catastrophic impact on budget, time, and overall project success. Moreover, large data sets intrinsically require extra technical and biological replicates to reach increasingly stringent statistical signifi- cance thresholds. Automating liquid movement for repetitive steps exerts fine control over volumes, error-free distribu- tion across hundreds of samples, and minimizes reagent waste. Most importantly, however, liquid handling systems can miniaturize reactions beyond what we can physically accomplish, including reproducibly filling 1,536-well plates in sub-microliter volumes.
investment for the instrument and its appendages? Can you physically fit everything into your workflows for the next several years, while accounting for both the instrument’s direct footprint and the negative space around it to ensure freedom of movement and user safety?
The first key to being able to answer these questions is to begin a relationship with a product vendor representative who can develop a thorough understanding of your current and future project needs. A vendor should be able to predict the size and extent of instrumentation based on the num- bers and types of samples you need to process, compatible external devices you will need, and how the system should be adaptable to evolve with future needs. For instance, if you need to add an entirely new assay or workflow in six months, how straightforward is that, and does your service plan cover the new customization?
The vendor should be ready with specifications beyond footprint and power consumption. These can include wheth- er a handler’s coefficient of variation is adequately small across a range of volumes to accommodate your workflow requirements; what assays, kits, and reagents are compatible and/or validated with the instrument and how they dictate
management of quality and regulatory compliance; and
“... liquid handling systems can miniaturize reactions beyond what we can physically accomplish, including reproducibly filling 1,536-well plates in sub-microliter volumes.”
This advance has been indispensable to the modern era of biomedical science, and liquid handling systems can now be scaled from industrial high-throughput chemical and anti- body screening (HTS) or protein structural characterization platforms, down to benchtop decks capable of integrating complete or partial automation into everyday laboratory workflows, such as NGS library prep, qPCR setup, and comparatively simple reformatting of liquid reservoirs into microwell plates.
The first reflexive concerns when considering purchase of a liquid handler will be money and space. Given your current and projected budget, what is the timeframe for a return on
the void or dead volumes created by automation that need to be discarded and how that translates (or doesn’t) into quantifiable long-term savings. Finally, the vendor should be able to provide a menu of service contracts tailored to your customized setup, and give real-world estimates of expected downtimes during maintenance.
Once you have established this important relationship, there are many more follow-up questions to ask, some of which are listed below:
Because the liquid handling robot will last a long time, to what extent will its adaptability to (1) integrate attach- ments, including those that may not yet be available, and/or are from market competitors, and (2) build capa- bility upon itself via modular scaling and customization, impact your future planned experimental workflows?
What safety and security features are included in the instrument design, and in the specific custom package, both in terms of data storage and auditing, and user safety via robot haptics and movement detection?
7 Questions to Ask When Buying an Automated Liquid Handler:
What is the volume range?
Will it be used for many different applications and is it compatible with multiple labware formats?
What technology is used?
Will you need to automate plate handling and will the instrument accommodate microplate stackers or robotic arms?
Does the ALH require specialized pipette tips?
Does it have other capabilities such as vacuum, magnetic bead separation, shaking, and heating and cooling?
How easy is the system to use and set up?
How intuitive and user-friendly is the system, from the liquid handling robot itself to the deck layout, and by extension how easy is it to change volumes, sample numbers, and the spatial outlay of samples within their destination plates and wells?
To extend the theme of user-friendliness:
How straightforward is user training on hardware and software, from the standpoint of programming at the front end, and analysis at the back end?
What specific elements in the available software packages drive user-friendliness? For instance, does it run analogously to MS Office apps, with copy, paste, and save functions? If needed or desired, can the user override the robot controls and command
a mouse and keyboard? And finally, are the Help
pages actually helpful?
If you are satisfied with your client-vendor relationship, can answer these questions, and confidently foresee your future uses and needs, then you are ready to purchase a liquid handling system and step into a new world of automated con- sistency and reliability.
Product Spotlight
INTEGRA D-ONE with ASSIST PLUS
The D-ONE single channel pipetting module enables hands-free transfers from individual tubes or wells using the ASSIST PLUS pipetting robot. This system effectively automates tedious tasks such as serial dilutions, sample normalization, hit picking or pipetting of complex plate layouts, increasing productivity and reproducibility in the lab while reducing hands-on time, processing errors and physical strain.
The D-ONE is available in two volume ranges to ensure optimal pipetting performance across a wide volume range. Each D-ONE module has two pipetting channels, using 12.5 and 300 μl or 125, and 1250 μl GRIPTIPS® for high and low volumes, respectively. The D-ONE pipetting module is compatible with all INTEGRA GRIPTIPS® used for benchtop pipetting devices, avoiding the need for special tips. The D-ONE tip deck can also accommodate two tip racks, this allows the ASSIST PLUS to automatically switch between the different GRIPTIPS® without tedious manual intervention, offering longer walk-away times.
Simplifying Lab Tasks with Automated Liquid Handling
Devices simplify and economize many basic lab processes
by Mike May, PhD
Most scientists or lab personnel with much experience pipetting—especially pipetting over and over—dream of automating liquid handling. This technology can be applied to a wide range of processes, from serial dilutions and cell culture to high-throughput screening and the polymerase chain reaction. Best of all, some platforms make automated liquid handling possible in almost any lab.
Not long ago, most automated liquid handlers required lots of lab space, mountains of money, and an expert in robotic programming. That limited the users to large pharmaceu- tical companies and other organizations with deep pockets. Now, for a few thousand dollars and a little bench space, most any lab can add automated liquid handling. Still, some obstacles must be addressed.
Overcoming obstacles
Achieving an automated protocol that works correctly (par- ticularly the fine tuning and troubleshooting process) is one of the most difficult parts of using lab robotics. The many rounds of trial and error required to establish a functional protocol can take an abundance of time during development.
Other experts agree that usability should be considered in a platform. For example, Scott Guelcher, professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering and director of the Vanderbilt Center for Bone Biology, says, “The two most important criteria of an automated liquid handling system are usability and reliability.”
“Developing user-friendly interfaces that make non-automation- specialists able to use such devices has expanded the potential of lab automation drastically.”
In a premium commercial liquid handler, Guelcher points out, intuitive user interfaces and redundant systems ensure correct pipetting. Getting those benefits, though, comes at a series of costs, including being expensive to purchase and maintain. As Guelcher adds, such systems “usually require proprietary plasticware.”
Conversely, not spending enough on a system can create other problems. As Guelcher points out, some inexpensive systems for automated pipetting can take a lot of time to set up and still generate errors in a workflow.
So, like many other scientists, Guelcher wants a balance— something at a low enough cost that provides the features re- quired for a variety of uses. And cost really matters. “It’s im- portant to remember that liquid handlers automate common processes that most labs can already perform manually, and therefore, many investigators find it difficult to justify the acquisition of these machines with high price tags,” he says.
An array of advances
Beyond smaller and more affordable options for automat- ed liquid handling, it takes far less expertise to use some platforms. In fact, ease of use is a crucial improvement in this technology. Developing user-friendly interfaces that
make non-automation-specialists able to use such devices has expanded the potential of lab automation drastically. Most scientists in the market for such technology should expect a platform that can be used without hiring an expert.
Advances in technology from other fields could also improve automated liquid handling. One example comes from ma- chine vision. Here, a camera and image-processing software control the pipettes. The machine vision can perform many tasks, from identifying the installed pipettes, if a well of a plate is empty, the location of plasticware on the platform, and so on. “These capabilities minimize human interven- tion and setup time while increasing reliability, because the only hardware requirement of machine vision is a camera,” Guelcher says. Although adding a camera increases a plat- form’s cost, such a system should be easier to set up and less prone to errors, according to Guelcher.
To really make this technology available in more labs and for more workflows, a platform needs to be affordable. That’s an ongoing improvement in parts of this instrument market, which is driving a wider range of applications, instead of just the high-throughput screening where automated liquid handling started.
Expanding the user base
Some less expensive but effective platforms already exist for automating liquid handling. Still, some do-it-yourself scientists will turn to other solutions. Guelcher is one of those scientists.
As an example, Guelcher and his colleagues built OTTO, which is an open-source automated liquid handler. As these scientists reported, this platform “can be fabricated at a
cost of $1,500 using off-the-shelf and 3D-printable parts as an alternative to commercial devices.” They also suggest that such a project doesn’t take that much time, and that the resulting platform can be used in common processes such as qPCR.
There’s clearly a range of ways to implement automated liquid handling. Plus, this technology can improve a variety of workflows. The solution for a lab depends on many factors, from applications and required throughput to economics and expertise. To get started, it pays to start out small and see how automation works in a lab. Jumping into too much auto- mation without the right preparation could be overwhelm- ing, not to mention a path to a mistake. So, look around, ask around, and see what fits best for your lab.
Product Spotlight
Agilent BioTek 406 FX washer dispenser
The Agilent BioTek 406 FX washer dispenser is a compact instrument offering fast, full plate washing along with up to six reagent dispensers.
Meeting Industry Demands Through Automation
Automation can be leveraged to meet increased throughput without compromising quality
by Paula McDaniel, PhD
As a lab manager facing demands for more or faster out- put, automation is often the first approach to address these challenges. When you start to tackle capacity improvement challenges, think broadly. Evaluate not only the core change but map the entire workflow to anticipate how automation will affect both upstream and downstream processes. You might discover new bottlenecks will be created with the addition of automation. This article walks through consid-
erations around the core automation and offers guidance for addressing secondary bottlenecks.
Achieving higher sample throughput with automation
Primary bottlenecks often revolve around increasing capac- ity of existing or new testing equipment. Many analytical
capabilities, such as gas/liquid/gel permeation chromatog- raphy, nuclear magnetic resonance, differential scanning calorimetry, and matrix-assisted-laser-desorption-ionization MS, routinely come with sample-changer technology. Auto- mation assumes the sample itself is pre-prepared and placed in a crimped vial, tube, sampling pan, or 96-well plate.
Automation capacity can vary from handling a handful of queued samples to a hundred or more using multiwell plates for high-throughput experimentation (HTE) needs.
In your decision process, evaluate the variability of your sam- ple streams and your lab’s charter. Based on your mission, the focus can fall into one or more of the below categories:
) Quality control lab—Known sample type and con- trolled concentration. Known controls and standards are also run in concert with the samples of interest.
) Research support—Sample types can vary greatly depending on the breadth of chemistries your team supports. The questions to be answered or experiment type might differ greatly (e.g. major component identifi- cation, impurity profile, or quantitation).
) Forensic work—Unknown samples needing various sample prep and screening protocols.
) Method development work—Capacity for methods development is driven by the sample constituents and experimental conditions.
This assessment comes down to the control and knowledge you have over the samples themselves. Can you set up the same prep and experimental protocol to cover a majority of your samples without doing some initial screening? Auto- mation can increase capacity to perform more individual tests on multiple samples but can also allow you to explore a wider experimental space needed for methods development or HTE support.
Ensuring sample suitability and integrity
Sample compatibility and stability in an automated environ- ment should be clearly assessed as well. Are prepared sam- ples stable or compatible with vials and sampling hardware? Understanding your material’s stability in the prep solvent and the timeline for degradation or interaction is vital to
automating your processes without compromising quality. Here are some questions to consider:
) Do samples need to be stored at sub-ambient tempera- ture for stability?
) Do they need storage at elevated temperatures to ensure all components stay in solution?
) Will samples degrade or react with vials, tubes, seals, or caps while sitting in the automation queue?
) Do the samples carry over from run to run, requir- ing multiple cleaning injections or frequent col- umn changes?
) Do the samples need storage in an inert environment requiring specialized prep conditions, such as a glove box?
Sample stability is a key parameter when understanding how best to utilize unattended automation for extended peri-
ods of time.
Finally, with automation in place, sample queue organization becomes a new factor you might not have faced previously. Group samples by solvent type, concentration, and experi- mental conditions in a testing queue to reduce the number of instrument set-ups. Longer run times or multiple injection volumes might be used on any individual sample to ensure sufficient sensitivity is achieved. It is inevitable that sample re-runs will be needed—e.g., a sample was unexpectedly diluted, the instrument was contaminated, issues with ma- terial stability, or the dreaded power outage. The additional capacity enabled by automation usually compensates for the re-runs required from the unexpected.
Adjusting staffing to accommodate automation
Automation has the greatest impact when there are multi- ple short runs during a 24-hour period, allowing for better utilization of overnight or weekend hours without operator intervention. Most organizations find that adding capital is easier to justify than increasing headcount; however, before investing in automation accessories, assess how simple staffing shifts might get you the boost you need. For exam- ple, a work-hour shift might enable you to double or triple your capacity without any capital investment. For example,
an early staff start time and a later staff start time can help you initiate 12-hour runs at 7 AM and 7 PM as opposed to a single run per day. This is where a granular evaluation of
the experiment and sample types ensures you make the most responsible decision.
Addressing post-automation bottlenecks
Following implementation, you might discover the bottle- neck has not been removed but simply shifted, requiring additional creative solutions. Anticipating these prior to implementation will help you manage customer expectations on the benefit. Two common areas relate to sample prepa- ration and analysis capacity. For the front end, streamline the sample prep area to reduce search time. Have all needed components (balances, solvents, waste stream containers, and more) in a well-organized area to reduce set-up and search time. Evaluate opportunities for batch prep of standards or samples to increase capacity as well. Get team buy-in on maintaining a clean and organized space—which you might find to be the biggest challenge of all!
Transcription errors are another potential pitfall of handling large numbers of samples. Sample parameters such as weight, IDs, experimental conditions, and position on the sample queue are all spots for potential errors. Barcode systems can be beneficial, as well as pre-prepared paper templates.
Processing data generated by automation
Finally, automation brings with it a plethora of information that needs processing, quality review, analysis, and interpre- tation. One of the keys to automation success is ensuring data quality and consistency throughout a long run. Use interim standard samples within a queue to ensure system cleanli- ness and stability throughout the long run. Establish a proto- col to assess data quality before investing time in analyzing potentially corrupt runs. Junior team members can often play a pivotal role in this phase, allowing senior scientists to focus on more advanced interpretation.
Software can be your friend in this phase. Consult with instrument vendor scientists on large dataset management. Additional vendor or third-party software might be a nec- essary investment to help your team manage the mountain of data coming their way. Even readily available spreadsheet software can perform batch calculations and reduce errors.
Additionally, don’t overlook the role your internal customers play in the decision between speed of findings and formali- ty of output. Many come to the workplace with experience in analyzing data, and they will favor early access to the processed results for self-analysis over waiting for a for-
mal report.
Today, automation is considered a worthwhile investment for most labs in the analytical test world. Commercial automated systems are readily available, and the associated software gives users tremendous flexibility in set-up, monitoring, and re-organizing queue runs remotely. Even capabilities that would not be straightforward to automate, such as electron microscopy and Raman spectroscopy, have been adapted to allow multiple sample analyses using a smart combination of sample positioning and data collection software.
With the industry’s greater focus on high-throughput experimentation, automation is the key to handling research- ers’ needs for large sampling space. As you look to remove bottlenecks in your lab through automation, don’t overlook upstream and downstream processes or your desired out- come won’t be achieved.
The Agilent BioTek range of compact, yet configurable microplate washers and dispensers offer a variety of solutions to meet your laboratory’s specific liquid handling needs. Agilent BioTek dispensers and washers can be integrated into many robotic systems for increased automation and efficiency. From basic ELISA to sensitive cell washing to bead washing, the washers offer modules to address myriad assay requirements.
INTEGRA is a leading provider of high quality laboratory tools and consumables for liquid handling. We are committed to fulfilling the needs of laboratory professionals in research, diagnostics, and quality control within the life sciences industry.
Eppendorf is a leading life science company that develops and supplies products catering to academic and commercial research laboratories. The product portfolio encompasses instrumentation, consumables, and services, catering to liquid, sample, and cell handling. From high quality pipettes to automated liquid handlers, our liquid handling solutions are designed for effortless adoption in lab workflows.
For over 75 years our products have gained the trust of laboratory researchers. Our scientists and engineers are on a constant mission to build on established methods to help address the challenges that today’s scientists face. Building on a foundation of experience, history and knowledge, we are committed to the future and continuously strive to improve human living conditions.
In partnership with