Compare › Nano Flow Cytometry vs. F-MRPS
Nanoscale Flow Cytometry vs. F-MRPS: Two single-particle methods — one fundamental difference.
Nanoscale Flow Cytometry and Spectradyne’s F-MRPS both measure single particles with fluorescence — making this a more nuanced comparison than MRPS vs. DLS. Both instruments go well beyond what bulk techniques like DLS can deliver. But they differ fundamentally in how they measure particle size and concentration, their dependence on optical properties, and how much preparation and expertise they require to operate reliably.
The core distinction: flow cytometers are optical instruments that use light scattering to size particles. F-MRPS uses electrical sensing. That single difference has significant downstream consequences for accuracy, ease of use, and the kinds of samples each method can measure reliably.
Where the methods diverge
Both measure single particles. Not all single-particle methods are equal.
One of the leaders in Nanoscale Flow Cytometry, NanoFCM, provides a capable instrument and a genuine step up from DLS and NTA. But its reliance on light scattering for particle sizing introduces limitations that become significant when measuring complex biological samples. F-MRPS addresses these limitations through a fundamentally different measurement principle.
Head-to-head
Nanoscale Flow Cytomery vs. F-MRPS: a direct comparison
| nanoFCM Nanoscale Flow Cytometry |
F-MRPS Spectradyne ARC |
|---|
View plain text data table
| Attribute | nanoFCM | F-MRPS (Spectradyne ARC) |
|---|---|---|
| Measurement principle | Optical — side-scatter light intensity for sizing | Electrical + optical — direct physical sizing, simultaneous fluorescence |
| Single-particle measurement | Yes | Yes |
| Single-particle fluorescence | Yes — typically single channel | Yes — up to 3 simultaneous channels alongside MRPS |
| Sizing method | Side-scatter intensity — depends on refractive index and particle optical properties | Electrical pulse amplitude — measures displaced volume directly, no optical assumptions |
| Absolute concentration | Partial — requires calibration with reference beads of matching optical properties | Yes — particle count divided by precisely measured sample volume. No calibration needed |
| Refractive index dependence | High — significantly affects both sizing and concentration accuracy | None — electrical sensing is completely independent of optical properties |
| Calibration and alignment | Poor — time-consuming optical alignment, calibration beads, and cleaning between samples required | Excellent — no alignment, no calibration standards, no cleaning. Disposable cartridges |
| Sample volume | Typically 10–100 µL with additional sample for calibration runs | Only 3 µL required |
| GMP/regulatory compliance | Not specifically designed for GMP workflows | GMP/GAMP and 21 CFR ready |
Why it matters
Where F-MRPS goes further for biological nanoparticles
For biological applications where both instruments are genuine options, F-MRPS’s electrical sensing foundation delivers key advantages that compound as sample complexity increases.
F-MRPS: two orthogonal methods in one measurement
The Spectradyne ARC uniquely combines MRPS electrical sizing with single-particle fluorescence detection in a single run. Unlike Nanoscale Flow Cytometry where fluorescence must be interpreted alongside optically-derived size, the ARC’s fluorescence data is collected simultaneously with an independent electrical size measurement. This means you get fluorescence phenotyping without any compromise in size or concentration accuracy, a truly orthogonal combination.
Learn more about the ARC Particle Analyzer →See it for yourself
Ready to see what F-MRPS reveals that Nanoscale Flow Cytometry can’t?
Send us your LNP, EV, virus, or other nanoparticle sample and we’ll run a free measurement on the ARC. You’ll receive a full size distribution, absolute concentration, and – where applicable – fluorescence phenotyping data, so you can see exactly what F-MRPS delivers.
Related comparisons