How Liquid Handler Automation Streamlines Workflows & Boosts Accuracy

Liquid handler automation is growing in popularity as a method of improving efficiency and accuracy within experimental workflows in modern laboratories. As workflows continue to increase in complexity and experiments become higher throughput, labs are becoming increasingly pressured to optimize their output¹. Liquid handler automation can improve various aspects of lab efficiency, leading to the optimization of lab output while retaining accuracy². 

This blog will describe the key benefits of liquid handler automation and compare the use of manual vs. automated liquid handling.

Key Benefits of Liquid Handler Automation

Increased Accuracy and Precision

Sample preparation is a tedious and complex process, making it a prime area for human errors. This can lead to inaccurate data and erroneous conclusions³. Liquid handler automation removes the requirement for labor-intensive processes where human error is most likely to occur and, through this, increases the accuracy and quality of the results⁴. In addition, the standardization of processes within an automated liquid handling system reduces variability between users and ensures confidence in results⁵.

Higher Throughput

Humans are limited in the number of samples that they can process within a certain amount of time. Attempting to increase manual throughput can result in injury, such as repetitive strain injuries, and errors, leading to an entire day’s work and precious samples being wasted^2,5. Liquid handler automation removes the experimental bottleneck caused by manual labor, dramatically increasing the number of samples that can be processed simultaneously without compromising on accuracy and precision⁶.

Improved Reproducibility

Large-scale studies require experiments to be scaled up while retaining consistency. Manual processing introduces variability from a multitude of sources, including intra-lab variability in techniques – such as manual pipetting variation⁷ – and inter-lab variability in equipment and protocols. Liquid handler automation standardizes liquid handling across experiments, therefore, reducing variability and the risk of a batch effect⁸. This ensures accuracy and quality, ultimately improving experiment reproducibility and scalability. 

Reduced Contamination Risk

Contamination during manual sample processing poses a significant risk to the accuracy of results and can lead to data misinterpretation. Liquid handler automation minimizes human contact with the samples, therefore, reducing the risk of contamination. Automated systems are closed, thus also reducing environmental exposure⁴.

Cost & Sustainability

Liquid handler automation reduces costs within the lab by reducing reagent waste and improving efficiency. Automated systems can be used to minimize reactions, reducing the volume of reagent required by up to a factor of 10 compared to the manufacturer’s recommendations¹⁰. Consequently, reagents will last up to 10 times as long compared to manual dispensing without miniaturization, saving reagents and costs. Liquid handler automation can also substantially reduce the dead volume of reagent – DISPENDIX’s I.DOT Liquid Handler has a dead volume of only 1 μL (Fig. 1).

The use of automated liquid handlers also enables a reduction in the wastage of single-use plastic consumables such as pipette tips¹¹. The average biology lab produces approximately 4000 kg of plastic waste annually¹². Liquid handler automation, such as that enabled by the I.DOT Non-contact Dispenser, uses contact-free dispensing solutions, minimizing the number of pipette tips used. This not only reduces plastic waste and increases sustainability, but also reduces consumable-related costs.

Figure 1. The I.DOT Liquid Handler uses specialized non-contact technology to minimize the reagent dead volume.

Case Study: Manual vs. Automated NGS Library Preparation Workflow

Manual NGS Library Prep Workflow

Fragmentation and End Repair

Enzymatic reagents are manually pipetted to carry out fragmentation and end-repair reactions. The accuracy of these steps directly impacts library generation efficiency¹³. 

Adapter Ligation

The ligation mix is manually pipetted, followed by manual cleanup to remove excess adapters and reagents. 

PCR Amplification

Samples are manually pipetted from source plates to PCR plates and multiple reagents are manually added to the PCR plates. Any errors or contamination at this stage will be amplified by the PCR process, resulting in amplification bias and erroneous results¹³.

Cleanup and Normalization

NGS cleanup requires multiple manual washing steps and the pipetting of magnetic beads to remove small DNA fragments which could interfere with effective sequencing. Normalization is essential for producing reliable results.

Challenges

• Increased risk of errors
• Inconsistency across samples
• Labor-intensive process
• Inefficient

Automated NGS Library Prep Workflow

Liquid handler automation can be integrated into NGS library prep workflows, to address many of the challenges that arise from manual processing (Fig. 2).

Figure 2. NGS workflow schematic demonstrating how the I.DOT and G.PURE can be integrated into library prep.

Automated Liquid Handling

Liquid handler automation, such as carried out by the I.DOT Liquid Handler, enables the precise and accurate pipetting of reagents in a standardized workflow. A high number of samples and reagents can be pipetted without any impact on precision.

Integrated Thermocycling and Clean-up

Multiple samples can be processed simultaneously without the need for human input. Automated cleanup can be carried out using the G.PURE NGS Clean-Up Device to increase yields and ensure purity.

Standardized Sample Normalization

The volume of the sample or reagent can be accurately adjusted using liquid handler automation, such as the I.DOT Liquid Handler.

Advantages

• Higher throughput
• Increased efficiency – faster processing time
• Reduced human error
• Improved reproducibility
• Increased cost-efficiency – use DISPENDIX’s G.PREP ROI calculator to see how much your lab could save.

Conclusion

Liquid handler automation transforms workflows by enhancing efficiency and increasing accuracy and reproducibility. The use of automated solutions reduces the risk of errors arising from pipetting errors or contamination, further ensuring the accuracy of the results. Cost-saving and sustainability benefits are also provided by the use of liquid handler automation. Complex workflows, such as NGS library prep, particularly benefit from automated solutions, including the I.DOT and G.PURE, due to the reduction in labor-intensive processes, the increase in throughput, and increased accuracy and reproducibility ensuring reliable results.

Ready to accelerate your research? 

Discover how DISPENDIX can enhance precision, efficiency, and reproducibility in your lab. Download the I.DOT brochure or the G.PREP brochure and take the next step in transforming your workflows!

References

1. Pereira SAP, Dyson PJ, Saraiva MLMFS. Miniaturized technologies for high-throughput drug screening enzymatic assays and diagnostics – A review. TrAC Trends Anal Chem. 2020;126:115862. doi:10.1016/j.trac.2020.115862
2. Socea JN, Stone VN, Qian X, Gibbs PL, Levinson KJ. Implementing laboratory automation for next-generation sequencing: benefits and challenges for library preparation. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1195581. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1195581
3. Hentz NG, Knaide TR. Effect of Liquid-Handling Accuracy on Assay Performance. SLAS Technol. 2014;19(2):153-162. doi:10.1177/2211068213504095
4. Hess JF, Kohl TA, Kotrová M, et al. Library preparation for next generation sequencing: A review of automation strategies. Biotechnol Adv. 2020;41:107537. doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2020.107537
5. Holland I, Davies JA. Automation in the Life Science Research Laboratory. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020;8. doi:10.3389/fbioe.2020.571777
6. O’Neill MD. Increasing Throughput with Automated Liquid Handling. Genet Eng Biotechnol News. 2012;32(12):18-21. doi:10.1089/gen.32.12.06
7. Guan XL, Chang DPS, Mok ZX, Lee B. Assessing variations in manual pipetting: An under-investigated requirement of good laboratory practice. J Mass Spectrom Adv Clin Lab. 2023;30:25-29. doi:10.1016/j.jmsacl.2023.09.001
8. Leek JT, Scharpf RB, Bravo HC, et al. Tackling the widespread and critical impact of batch effects in high-throughput data. Nat Rev Genet. 2010;11(10):733-739. doi:10.1038/nrg2825
9. Kotrova M, Trka J, Kneba M, Brüggemann M. Is Next-Generation Sequencing the way to go for Residual Disease Monitoring in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia? Mol Diagn Ther. 2017;21(5):481-492. doi:10.1007/s40291-017-0277-9
10. Suckling L, McFarlane C, Sawyer C, et al. Miniaturisation of high-throughput plasmid DNA library preparation for next-generation sequencing using multifactorial optimisation. Synth Syst Biotechnol. 2019;4(1):57. doi:10.1016/j.synbio.2019.01.002
11. Thakur A, Mukhopadhyay T, Ahirwar AK. Approaching sustainability in Laboratory Medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med CCLM. 2024;62(9):1787-1794. doi:10.1515/cclm-2023-0973
12. Freese T, Elzinga N, Heinemann M, Lerch MM, Feringa BL. The relevance of sustainable laboratory practices. RSC Sustain. 2024;2(5):1300-1336. doi:10.1039/D4SU00056K
13. NGS library preparation. Accessed February 26, 2025. http://www.qiagen.com/us/knowledge-and-support/knowledge-hub/bench-guide/ngs/dna-sequencing/library-preparation