Tweet
No one seems to mention the Polonator at sequencing conferences, as far as I can tell, nor does anyone know much about the company supposedly commercializing the system. Will the thing ever see the light of day in your opinion? I would think that most people want the sort of technical support that comes from a company with experience in the field.
-
-
We have two Polonators G 007. in our lab. The Polonator is cheaper than others. It costs $150,000. It is a good open "machine". -
I know someone who has one. The impression I get is that it can't quite keep up with the throughput and read length of the major commercial platforms (just doesn't have the same R&D thrust behind it) but certainly has a lower barrier to entry cost-wise. It also looks like it would be a good platform to develop alternative applications due to the open-ness.Comment
-
I don't have a Polonator, but here is a reason to consider it serious:
Ever tried to do trouble-shooting on a commercial platform? It's pretty hard because much of what is going on is hidden from you, considered a "trade secret". That is, the companies are deliberately hiding from you the mechanisms of operation of a device you supposedly are doing science on.
Is that even science? Here is a test, try and write a manuscript where you refuse to divulge critical information about your methodology and see if you can get it published. It is unlikely you will succeed. Yet manuscripts are published every day containing data generated using methodologies not available to us. Why? Because those methodologies are performed using commercial instruments or kits.
Not all companies work this way. So, in principle, it is not necessary.
Polonator is one example. As csc says, they don't have the same amount of R&D plowed into them. But, hey, that is partially because we keep sinking our research dollars into products from companies that hide their methods from us.
--
PhillipComment
-
I suspect MiSeq and IonTorrent will truly consign Polonator to a very small niche of true believers, as the cost advantages (both upfront & per sample) will evaporate. It sounds like a well engineered machine, but with very short reads and too little user base to drive the applications needed to make it interesting to a larger community.Comment
-
-
Apparently the Polonator is no longer being sold but customers are being offered upgrade to the new Max-Seq.Comment
-
What exactly is the IP situation of the polonator?Comment
-
Polonator update
"The new version of Polonator - PinPoint Mini Sequencing Platform"
Just to clarify: the closest thing you have to a "new version of the polonator" would be the MaxSeq, which is actually a very diferent instrument. It works with sequencing by syntesis (as well as with sequencing by ligation), and uses a library prep chemistry (rolonies) which is far easier to use than polonies, altough it can also use this last one. The PinPoint Mini is a smaller platform, with lower throughput, but faster runs, similar to another instrument that was recently released by another commercial company. This instrument is not available yet.
The strongest point of both the instruments is that running them will be much cheaper than all other current solutions. And for the MaxSeq, even the instrument itself is much cheaper than the other commercialy available platforms. If you have any questions about it, please let me know.
EzequielComment
-
Update on the system status
Hello everyone
Just to let you know:
As I already mentioned in this thread, the polonator is no longer being commercialized. Another instrument, which is partially derived from the polonator (some hardware parts only) is now available, called the MaxSeq.
This new instrument was totally redesigned by IBS, having SBS as a center piece of the instrument's development.
It will also carry other significant advantages, as higher throughput, faster runs and even cheaper consumables.
We are hoping to have a specific forum on the Sequencing Technologies/Companies section, so we can post some news about it.
In the mean time, I can tell you that we are now installing our first machine, and we have created a blog where everyone will be able to follow this installation as well as the following weeks of instrument's operation.
The blog is here:
We will also bring some more news soon, regarding another instrument that will be officially launched in March.
Enjoy!
Comment
-
Qiagen buys IBS
Now I can see it take off...
Comment
-
I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.
Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...06-18-2026, 07:11 AM -
Data variability is still an issue in sequencing technologies despite the advances in reproducibility and accuracy of these platforms. But the problem does not originate in the sequencing itself, but in the previous steps, before the sample reaches the sequencer.
The first step is collection, followed by preservation and sample preparation for analysis. Most scientists overlook those steps, but not being careful might just be skewing the experiment’s results.
...06-02-2026, 10:05 AM
Comment