Review



array tm ifc  (fluidigm)


Bioz Verified Symbol fluidigm is a verified supplier
Bioz Manufacturer Symbol fluidigm manufactures this product  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
  • 93

    Structured Review

    fluidigm array tm ifc
    Array Tm Ifc, supplied by fluidigm, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 148 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/Array+Tm+Ifc/Assay+Loading+Reagent/pm39855563-97-8-14
    Average 93 stars, based on 148 article reviews
    array tm ifc - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    93/100 stars

    Images

    Related Articles

    other:

    Article Title: Multiplexed detection of febrile infections using CARMEN.
    Article Snippet: The assay also included 2X Assay Loading Reagent (Fluidigm), 69 U T7 RNA Polymerase mix (NEB), and crRNAs at 1 μM concentrations, resulting in a total volume of 16 μl per reaction.

    Article Title: Synergy between HA cleavage site sequence and NA-mediated plasminogen recruitment as a virulence mechanism for low-pathogenic avian influenza.
    Article Snippet: Assay mixes were prepared with 2.25 μL 2× assay loading reagent (Fluidigm), 2.5 μL of primer pair mix (1.15 μM), and 0.25 μL low EDTA TE buffer.

    Article Title: Chronic Night Shift Is More Detrimental Than Chronic Light at Night on Circadian Rhythmicity and Metabolic Health in a Female Diurnal Rodent
    Article Snippet: An assay mix was obtained by addition of 4.0 μL 2X Assay Loading Reagent (Standard Biotools) and 4.0 μL of primers (10 μM of each foward and reverse primer).

    Article Title: Parental fasting effects on offspring immune gene expression, epigenetic patterns, and gut microbiota in a species with male pregnancy (Syngnathus typhle).
    Article Snippet: The assay mix for the chip consisted of 369.6 uL Assay Loading Reagent (Fluidigm) and 295.7 uL low EDTA-TE buffer.

    Article Title: Parental fasting effects on offspring immune gene expression, epigenetic patterns, and gut microbiota in a species with male pregnancy ( Syngnathus typhle)
    Article Snippet: The assay mix for the chip consisted of 369.6 μL of Assay Loading Reagent (Fluidigm) and 295.7 μL of low EDTA-TE buffer.

    Binding Assay:

    Article Title: Parental fasting effects on offspring immune gene expression, epigenetic patterns, and gut microbiota in a species with male pregnancy (Syngnathus typhle).
    Article Snippet: .. AR TIC LE IN PR ES S For the sample pre-mix, we combined 369.6 uL Ssofast-EvaGreen Supermix with Low ROX (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA, USA) with 37 uL 20x DNA Binding Dye Sample & Assay Loading Reagent (Fluidigm). ..

    Article Title: Parental fasting effects on offspring immune gene expression, epigenetic patterns, and gut microbiota in a species with male pregnancy ( Syngnathus typhle)
    Article Snippet: .. For the sample premix, we combined 369.6 μL of Ssofast-EvaGreen Supermix with Low ROX (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA, USA) and 37 μL of 20 × DNA Binding Dye Sample & Assay Loading Reagent (Fluidigm). ..

    Polymerase Chain Reaction:

    Article Title: Experimental inoculation of pigs with porcine parainfluenza virus 1 revealed pathological manifestations in the upper respiratory tract.
    Article Snippet: A total volume of 10 μL was prepared by mixing 2.5 μL of cDNA with 5 μL of 2X TaqMan PreAmp master mix (Applied Biosystems), and 2.5 μL of primer mix (200 nM, containing all sets of primers). .. Each PCR assay mix was prepared by mixing 2 μL primer/probe stock (containing 33 μM of each primer and 10 μM of probe) with 2 μL of 2X assay loading reagent (Standard BioTools). .. The pre-amplification was carried out in a PCRmax Alpha thermocycler (Cole-Parmer) using the following thermal cycling program: 95°C for 10 min PLOS Pathogens | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1013405 March 30, 2026 7 / 19 followed by 14 cycles of 95°C for 15 s and 60°C for 4 min.



    Similar Products

    86
    Biomark Inc real time pcr dynamic array tm ifc platform
    Real Time Pcr Dynamic Array Tm Ifc Platform, supplied by Biomark Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/Array+Tm+Ifc/48+48+array+biomark+dynamic/pmc12559939-3-8-7
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    real time pcr dynamic array tm ifc platform - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    86/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    fluidigm array tm ifc
    Array Tm Ifc, supplied by fluidigm, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/Array+Tm+Ifc/Assay+Loading+Reagent/pm39855563-97-8-14
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    array tm ifc - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    95
    fluidigm array tm integrated fluidic circuits
    Array Tm Integrated Fluidic Circuits, supplied by fluidigm, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 95/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/Array+Tm+Ifc/96%2E96+Dynamic+Array+IFC+for+Genotyping/pmc11507445-179-3-8
    Average 95 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    array tm integrated fluidic circuits - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    95/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    95
    fluidigm tm instrument
    Tm Instrument, supplied by fluidigm, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 95/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/Array+Tm+Ifc/96%2E96+Dynamic+Array+IFC+for+Gene+Expression/pmc09861536-125-38-40
    Average 95 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    tm instrument - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    95/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    96
    fluidigm biomark tm ifc dynamic array tm genotyping
    Estimations of duck genome retention in the RH clones. A: retention frequencies of thirty-one microsatellite markers and four scaffold markers before (white) and after (grey) whole genome amplification. The test was done on the 90 selected hybrids by conventional Agarose <t>genotyping.</t> The expected chromosome locations of the markers (given in brackets) are derived from the chicken/duck comparative FISH mapping and a duck genetic map (Marie-Etancelin et al., in prep) for the microsatellite markers and according to comparative genomic data given by the Narcisse software for the scaffold markers. B : Retention frequencies of thirty-nine scaffolds markers obtained using three different genotyping strategies. The thirty-nine scaffold markers were genotyped using either (i) the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping (blue: WGA-PCR), (ii) the non amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark gene expression dynamic array (green: Pre-ampFLDMqPCR) or (iii) the amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark TM <t>IFC</t> Dynamic Array TM genotyping by quantitative PCR without any pre-amplification step (purple: WGA-FLDMqPCR). The markers are distributed along the X axis from the lowest to the highest retention frequencies obtained by the first method (the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping WGA-PCR in blue).
    Biomark Tm Ifc Dynamic Array Tm Genotyping, supplied by fluidigm, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/Array+Tm+Ifc/Biomark/pmc03496577-172-9-8
    Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    biomark tm ifc dynamic array tm genotyping - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    96/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    90
    fluidigm 96.96 dynamic array tm integrated fluidic circuit (ifc)
    Estimations of duck genome retention in the RH clones. A: retention frequencies of thirty-one microsatellite markers and four scaffold markers before (white) and after (grey) whole genome amplification. The test was done on the 90 selected hybrids by conventional Agarose <t>genotyping.</t> The expected chromosome locations of the markers (given in brackets) are derived from the chicken/duck comparative FISH mapping and a duck genetic map (Marie-Etancelin et al., in prep) for the microsatellite markers and according to comparative genomic data given by the Narcisse software for the scaffold markers. B : Retention frequencies of thirty-nine scaffolds markers obtained using three different genotyping strategies. The thirty-nine scaffold markers were genotyped using either (i) the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping (blue: WGA-PCR), (ii) the non amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark gene expression dynamic array (green: Pre-ampFLDMqPCR) or (iii) the amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark TM <t>IFC</t> Dynamic Array TM genotyping by quantitative PCR without any pre-amplification step (purple: WGA-FLDMqPCR). The markers are distributed along the X axis from the lowest to the highest retention frequencies obtained by the first method (the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping WGA-PCR in blue).
    96.96 Dynamic Array Tm Integrated Fluidic Circuit (Ifc), supplied by fluidigm, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/Array+Tm+Ifc/48+48+dynamic+array+integrated+fluidic+circuits/pmc09604607-93-31-47
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    96.96 dynamic array tm integrated fluidic circuit (ifc) - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    95
    fluidigm 48 48 dynamic array tm integrated fluid circuit
    Estimations of duck genome retention in the RH clones. A: retention frequencies of thirty-one microsatellite markers and four scaffold markers before (white) and after (grey) whole genome amplification. The test was done on the 90 selected hybrids by conventional Agarose <t>genotyping.</t> The expected chromosome locations of the markers (given in brackets) are derived from the chicken/duck comparative FISH mapping and a duck genetic map (Marie-Etancelin et al., in prep) for the microsatellite markers and according to comparative genomic data given by the Narcisse software for the scaffold markers. B : Retention frequencies of thirty-nine scaffolds markers obtained using three different genotyping strategies. The thirty-nine scaffold markers were genotyped using either (i) the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping (blue: WGA-PCR), (ii) the non amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark gene expression dynamic array (green: Pre-ampFLDMqPCR) or (iii) the amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark TM <t>IFC</t> Dynamic Array TM genotyping by quantitative PCR without any pre-amplification step (purple: WGA-FLDMqPCR). The markers are distributed along the X axis from the lowest to the highest retention frequencies obtained by the first method (the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping WGA-PCR in blue).
    48 48 Dynamic Array Tm Integrated Fluid Circuit, supplied by fluidigm, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 95/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/Array+Tm+Ifc/48%2E48+Dynamic+Array+IFC+for+Genotyping/pmc08773042-78-11-19
    Average 95 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    48 48 dynamic array tm integrated fluid circuit - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    95/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    95
    fluidigm array tm ifcs
    Estimations of duck genome retention in the RH clones. A: retention frequencies of thirty-one microsatellite markers and four scaffold markers before (white) and after (grey) whole genome amplification. The test was done on the 90 selected hybrids by conventional Agarose <t>genotyping.</t> The expected chromosome locations of the markers (given in brackets) are derived from the chicken/duck comparative FISH mapping and a duck genetic map (Marie-Etancelin et al., in prep) for the microsatellite markers and according to comparative genomic data given by the Narcisse software for the scaffold markers. B : Retention frequencies of thirty-nine scaffolds markers obtained using three different genotyping strategies. The thirty-nine scaffold markers were genotyped using either (i) the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping (blue: WGA-PCR), (ii) the non amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark gene expression dynamic array (green: Pre-ampFLDMqPCR) or (iii) the amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark TM <t>IFC</t> Dynamic Array TM genotyping by quantitative PCR without any pre-amplification step (purple: WGA-FLDMqPCR). The markers are distributed along the X axis from the lowest to the highest retention frequencies obtained by the first method (the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping WGA-PCR in blue).
    Array Tm Ifcs, supplied by fluidigm, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 95/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/Array+Tm+Ifc/96%2E96+Dynamic+Array+IFC+for+Gene+Expression/bio_rxiv__2021__12__13__472353-116-24-27
    Average 95 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    array tm ifcs - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    95/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    90
    fluidigm 48.48 dynamic array tm ifcs
    Estimations of duck genome retention in the RH clones. A: retention frequencies of thirty-one microsatellite markers and four scaffold markers before (white) and after (grey) whole genome amplification. The test was done on the 90 selected hybrids by conventional Agarose <t>genotyping.</t> The expected chromosome locations of the markers (given in brackets) are derived from the chicken/duck comparative FISH mapping and a duck genetic map (Marie-Etancelin et al., in prep) for the microsatellite markers and according to comparative genomic data given by the Narcisse software for the scaffold markers. B : Retention frequencies of thirty-nine scaffolds markers obtained using three different genotyping strategies. The thirty-nine scaffold markers were genotyped using either (i) the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping (blue: WGA-PCR), (ii) the non amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark gene expression dynamic array (green: Pre-ampFLDMqPCR) or (iii) the amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark TM <t>IFC</t> Dynamic Array TM genotyping by quantitative PCR without any pre-amplification step (purple: WGA-FLDMqPCR). The markers are distributed along the X axis from the lowest to the highest retention frequencies obtained by the first method (the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping WGA-PCR in blue).
    48.48 Dynamic Array Tm Ifcs, supplied by fluidigm, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/Array+Tm+Ifc/48+48+access+array+ifc/pmc08602333-454-19-34
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    48.48 dynamic array tm ifcs - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    90/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    Estimations of duck genome retention in the RH clones. A: retention frequencies of thirty-one microsatellite markers and four scaffold markers before (white) and after (grey) whole genome amplification. The test was done on the 90 selected hybrids by conventional Agarose genotyping. The expected chromosome locations of the markers (given in brackets) are derived from the chicken/duck comparative FISH mapping and a duck genetic map (Marie-Etancelin et al., in prep) for the microsatellite markers and according to comparative genomic data given by the Narcisse software for the scaffold markers. B : Retention frequencies of thirty-nine scaffolds markers obtained using three different genotyping strategies. The thirty-nine scaffold markers were genotyped using either (i) the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping (blue: WGA-PCR), (ii) the non amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark gene expression dynamic array (green: Pre-ampFLDMqPCR) or (iii) the amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark TM IFC Dynamic Array TM genotyping by quantitative PCR without any pre-amplification step (purple: WGA-FLDMqPCR). The markers are distributed along the X axis from the lowest to the highest retention frequencies obtained by the first method (the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping WGA-PCR in blue).

    Journal: BMC Genomics

    Article Title: A duck RH panel and its potential for assisting NGS genome assembly

    doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-13-513

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Estimations of duck genome retention in the RH clones. A: retention frequencies of thirty-one microsatellite markers and four scaffold markers before (white) and after (grey) whole genome amplification. The test was done on the 90 selected hybrids by conventional Agarose genotyping. The expected chromosome locations of the markers (given in brackets) are derived from the chicken/duck comparative FISH mapping and a duck genetic map (Marie-Etancelin et al., in prep) for the microsatellite markers and according to comparative genomic data given by the Narcisse software for the scaffold markers. B : Retention frequencies of thirty-nine scaffolds markers obtained using three different genotyping strategies. The thirty-nine scaffold markers were genotyped using either (i) the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping (blue: WGA-PCR), (ii) the non amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark gene expression dynamic array (green: Pre-ampFLDMqPCR) or (iii) the amplified panel and genotyping with the Fluidigm BioMark TM IFC Dynamic Array TM genotyping by quantitative PCR without any pre-amplification step (purple: WGA-FLDMqPCR). The markers are distributed along the X axis from the lowest to the highest retention frequencies obtained by the first method (the amplified panel with conventional agarose genotyping WGA-PCR in blue).

    Article Snippet: In our case, by performing qPCR with the Fluidigm BioMark TM IFC Dynamic Array TM genotyping, the additional benefit is high throughput, as the identification of bands on gel electrophoresis is replaced by monitoring the PCR with Ct (Cycle threshold) and end point Tm (melting temperature) values, allowing the distinction between specific and non-specific amplification profiles.

    Techniques: Clone Assay, Whole Genome Amplification, Derivative Assay, Software, Amplification, Expressing, Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction

    Genotyping by Fluidigm BioMarkTM IFC Dynamic ArrayTM quantitative PCR. (A) WGA-FLDMqPCR: WGA-amplified DNA and qPCR. Left: double-strand DNA (dsDNA) accumulation curve as a function of the number of cycles. Right: melting curve of the final product. Green: positive control (duck DNA). Red: a hybrid which was positive (containing duck DNA corresponding to the marker tested). Blue: a negative hybrid. Yellow: negative control (hamster DNA). (B) Pre-ampFLDMqPCR: non-amplified DNA, a pre-amplification step with a mix of the 96 primer pairs for the 96 markers tested in the Fluidigm BioMarkTM assay and qPCR. The same markers and controls are used as in (A) . The sensitivity is higher in (B) , with a lower number of cycles necessary for detection of duck DNA. The negative control and the hybrid not containing duck DNA amplify at a much higher number of cycles and the non-specific products amplified can easily be distinguished by their different melting temperature values (right). In both experiments, no amplification was obtained from water (data not shown).

    Journal: BMC Genomics

    Article Title: A duck RH panel and its potential for assisting NGS genome assembly

    doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-13-513

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Genotyping by Fluidigm BioMarkTM IFC Dynamic ArrayTM quantitative PCR. (A) WGA-FLDMqPCR: WGA-amplified DNA and qPCR. Left: double-strand DNA (dsDNA) accumulation curve as a function of the number of cycles. Right: melting curve of the final product. Green: positive control (duck DNA). Red: a hybrid which was positive (containing duck DNA corresponding to the marker tested). Blue: a negative hybrid. Yellow: negative control (hamster DNA). (B) Pre-ampFLDMqPCR: non-amplified DNA, a pre-amplification step with a mix of the 96 primer pairs for the 96 markers tested in the Fluidigm BioMarkTM assay and qPCR. The same markers and controls are used as in (A) . The sensitivity is higher in (B) , with a lower number of cycles necessary for detection of duck DNA. The negative control and the hybrid not containing duck DNA amplify at a much higher number of cycles and the non-specific products amplified can easily be distinguished by their different melting temperature values (right). In both experiments, no amplification was obtained from water (data not shown).

    Article Snippet: In our case, by performing qPCR with the Fluidigm BioMark TM IFC Dynamic Array TM genotyping, the additional benefit is high throughput, as the identification of bands on gel electrophoresis is replaced by monitoring the PCR with Ct (Cycle threshold) and end point Tm (melting temperature) values, allowing the distinction between specific and non-specific amplification profiles.

    Techniques: Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction, Amplification, Positive Control, Marker, Negative Control

     Genotyping  8 no hit markers using three different genotyping strategies

    Journal: BMC Genomics

    Article Title: A duck RH panel and its potential for assisting NGS genome assembly

    doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-13-513

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Genotyping 8 no hit markers using three different genotyping strategies

    Article Snippet: In our case, by performing qPCR with the Fluidigm BioMark TM IFC Dynamic Array TM genotyping, the additional benefit is high throughput, as the identification of bands on gel electrophoresis is replaced by monitoring the PCR with Ct (Cycle threshold) and end point Tm (melting temperature) values, allowing the distinction between specific and non-specific amplification profiles.

    Techniques:

    Comparison of marker retention with the three  genotyping  techniques

    Journal: BMC Genomics

    Article Title: A duck RH panel and its potential for assisting NGS genome assembly

    doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-13-513

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of marker retention with the three genotyping techniques

    Article Snippet: In our case, by performing qPCR with the Fluidigm BioMark TM IFC Dynamic Array TM genotyping, the additional benefit is high throughput, as the identification of bands on gel electrophoresis is replaced by monitoring the PCR with Ct (Cycle threshold) and end point Tm (melting temperature) values, allowing the distinction between specific and non-specific amplification profiles.

    Techniques: Marker