Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • DonDolowy
    Member
    • Oct 2012
    • 56

    #1

    MspI digestion - how is it supposed to look?

    Hi all,

    I am trying to prepare RRBS-seq library, but have some questions regarding the MspI digestion. I find my results a bit odd, since not much is digested and I have not been able to find a representative digestion of gDNA with MspI.

    I did a time course (1hr, 2hrs, 6hrs and ON) of 1ug gDNA digested with 20U MspI from NEB, but the shift is not great.

    Is the enzyme not working or is this to be expected, since RRBS is only taking 5-10% of the genome into consideration. How come that I also already see a bit of degradation in the lane with undigested gDNA?

    Thanks a lot. Appreciate your input.

    // Kevin
    Attached Files
  • C.R.
    Member
    • Jun 2010
    • 25

    #2
    here is an example: http://www.zymoresearch.com/epigenet...ylated-dna-set

    You probably used a 2% agarose gel to get a nice separation of the 100 bp ladder and the small fragments which you want to excise. Unfortunatley, under these conditions the pattern of the digest looks very similar to uncleaved DNA. Try a lower concentrated gel and you will see a better separation of the bigger fragments.

    Comment

    • DonDolowy
      Member
      • Oct 2012
      • 56

      #3
      Hey again, I have now tried several times to digest gDNA with MspI but I never get fragments in the low range (>500bp).
      I have tried MspI enzyme from both NEB and Fermentas, which I have tested on commercial human and mouse DNA. Incubation time was 12 hours at 37C.

      Since it is just a simple restriction digestion, what can possibly go wrong?

      I have attached the bioanalyzer results (high sensitivity DNA chip).
      Attached Files

      Comment

      • C.R.
        Member
        • Jun 2010
        • 25

        #4
        Hey, the digest just works so good, that I already omit to check it on a gel to safe DNA for some samples. I also used NEB and Fermentas and prepared Libaries with both. If you really want to see the smear after digest: take 500ng to 1 µg DNA and incubate at 37C. 2 hours are already enough. Important: put the digested DNA on a 0.7 to 1 percent agarose gel. Do not use the Bioanalyzer CHIP here. If this does not help: can you cut the DNA with other enzymes? Do you really have pure DNA?

        Comment

        • DonDolowy
          Member
          • Oct 2012
          • 56

          #5
          Hi C.R, thanks for the quick reply. The DNA I am working on now is completely pure, since it is commercial DNA bought only for optimization to exclude potential problems with impure DNA.
          I have also tried to load on a 0.5% gel and I get kind of a smear, but when I continue with the Biooscientific RRBS-seq protocol and do size-selection (300-500bp) using beads, I end up with nothing.
          To eliminate rookie mistakes when handling the beads, I asked our sequencing facility to test the protocol, since they are very experienced in library prep for all kind of applications. They as well failed, so it suggests that there really is no small bands.

          What is the reason for not using bioanalyzer chips for this purpose? Maybe because the undigested gDNA is taking up such a huge fraction that the chip won't show the small amount of fragmented DNA there might is?

          Thanks a lot!

          Comment

          • C.R.
            Member
            • Jun 2010
            • 25

            #6
            Yes, I was also very confused when I looked at my first digest on a 2 percent gel, since I thought that it did not work. Basically what I saw was an accumulation of long fragments which made me think that the digest did not work. I am still doing the traditional gel-excise method, but I think that in principle the bead based method also should work.

            Comment

            • DonDolowy
              Member
              • Oct 2012
              • 56

              #7
              I now performed another MspI digestion on commercial available mouse gDNA.

              2ug DNA
              5uL Cutsmart buffer
              1.5uL MspI enzyme
              ------
              Total volume 50uL. 37C, 2hours.

              Followed by cleanup using phenol/chloroform/isoamyl alcohol and EtOH precipitation.

              I then loaded 1ug on a 0.7% gel, ran 90min @ 100V. The ladder is Fermentas 100bp ladder.

              To me there is basically no fragments in the desired range 200-400bp.

              I would very much appreciate your inputs!
              Attached Files

              Comment

              • C.R.
                Member
                • Jun 2010
                • 25

                #8
                I am not too sure about your image, because the undigested control is missing. In fact I think, that you can see a smear of fragments on your gel picture.

                Please have a look at the attached image. MspI was included to the samples on the left side. The right side is the same DNA without any treatment as control. You can clearly see that the enzyme was active and created a smear of fragments ranging from very long fragments to very short ones. Next you see that there is no real enrichment of small fragments visible in this resolution.
                Attached Files

                Comment

                • DonDolowy
                  Member
                  • Oct 2012
                  • 56

                  #9
                  That gel looks great. Far from what I am getting!
                  How do you extract your DNA? And are you also using MspI from NEB?

                  Comment

                  • C.R.
                    Member
                    • Jun 2010
                    • 25

                    #10
                    Yes it is from NEB. For the gel I used 3µg DNA, 5µl buffer 4, 2µl MspI in a total volume of 50µl. 1/3 of the digest was directly used for the gel without phenol-extraction. The gel is 0.7% Agarose in TAE and the ladder is the GeneRuler DNA Ladder Mix (100-10000). I just realized that I am still using an old stock of the enzyme with buffer 4 instead of the new CutSmart version. I doubt that the buffer system change evokes a big difference. But maybe it is worth to ask NEB if this might explain your results.

                    Comment

                    • DonDolowy
                      Member
                      • Oct 2012
                      • 56

                      #11
                      Finally, it seems like it is working now!

                      Using a heat block or water bath instead of thermo cycler seems to do the trick. Incredible
                      No big changes between Fermentas and NEB's MspI enzyme.
                      Attached Files

                      Comment

                      • rosatoc
                        Member
                        • Apr 2008
                        • 22

                        #12
                        Very interesting... We are trying the PstI/MspI double digest, and as we are not getting any library that we can detect (due to humongous adapter dimers) we are trying a number of optimizing experiments. Perhaps the waterbath/heat block could be another variable we can use. Thanks for posting

                        Comment

                        • JeremyDay
                          Registered Vendor
                          • Feb 2012
                          • 25

                          #13
                          Hi rosatoc,

                          We struggled with RRBS for a couple of months. The input was DNA from 64-cell embryos, so ~200pg. Eventually we ended up using Nugen's ultra-low Ovation kit. We never saw the digestion, but DID see traces after library prep that resembled Nugen's trace @ 200pg. If I remember correctly we only needed 7-8 cycles of amp, in comparison to above 25 in previous attempts. We were observing what looked like adapter concatemers (evenly spaced ladder, unlike MSPI traces), which were verified by sequencing. 99% adapter dimers! Anyhow, we had a couple of small issues with the indexes and sequencing quality, but the library prep was much better. They have a proprietary blunt-end ligation chemistry, but somehow improves efficiency. It's expensive, but they were very generous on a trial kit.

                          Comment

                          • Castrolsc
                            Junior Member
                            • May 2018
                            • 3

                            #14
                            Doubts about MspI digestion

                            Hi all!

                            I'm having the same situation described before. I'm trying to use the Premium RRBS kit (Diagenode) to analyze bovine DNA samples and it seems the restriction enzyme from the kit is not working well for my DNA (sperm DNA in the picture). I got gDNA from fish testes from another lab which worked for this kit before, and the digestion looks fine.
                            I'm doing the incubation in water bath (as suggested here before), 37°C overnight, and following the kit instructions (100 ng of DNA in 26 uL of water, 1 uL of restriction enzyme and 3 uL of the buffer).
                            The person who gave me this gDNA recommended to do a clean-up DNA with beads and elute the DNA in water, so I did that for both DNAs, so it should not be a problem related to the sample buffer.
                            Any suggestions? I tried to look in the literature some profile of bovine DNA digested with MspI but I couldn't find anything, so I don't know what expect.
                            Attached Files
                            Last edited by Castrolsc; 05-18-2018, 11:45 AM.

                            Comment

                            • JeremyDay
                              Registered Vendor
                              • Feb 2012
                              • 25

                              #15
                              I hope you mean 100ng of DNA

                              Comment

                              Latest Articles

                              Collapse

                              • SEQadmin2
                                Beyond CRISPR/Cas9: Understand, Choose, and Use the Right Genome Editing Tool
                                by SEQadmin2



                                CRISPR/Cas9 sparked the gene editing revolution for both research and therapeutics.1 But this system still showed severe issues that limited its applications. The most prominent were the heavy reliance on PAM sequences, delivery limitations, double-stranded breaks that prompt unintended edits and cell death, and editing inefficiency (both in targeting and in knock-in reliability).

                                Despite this, “CRISPR helped turn genome editing from a specialized technique into
                                ...
                                Today, 11:01 AM
                              • SEQadmin2
                                Proteomic Platforms: How to Choose the Right Analytical Strategy to Improve Detection and Clinical Applications
                                by SEQadmin2


                                Proteomics platforms are evolving rapidly, with advances in mass spectrometry and affinity-based approaches expanding what researchers can detect and at what scale. As the field moves toward deeper proteome coverage and clinical applications, scientists face an increasingly complex landscape of tools. This article will explore how researchers are navigating these choices to find the right platform for their work.

                                The systematic characterization of the human proteome has
                                ...
                                07-20-2026, 11:48 AM
                              • SEQadmin2
                                Advanced Sequencing Platforms Tackle Neuroscience’s Toughest Genomics Problems
                                by SEQadmin2



                                Genomics studies in neuroscience face a special challenge due to the brain’s complexity and scarcity of samples. Mapping changes in cell type and state using conventional next-generation sequencing methods remains challenging. Advances in technologies like single-cell sequencing, spatial transcriptomics, and long-read sequencing have opened the door to deeper studies of the brain and diseases like Alzheimer’s, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and schizophrenia.
                                ...
                                07-09-2026, 11:10 AM

                              ad_right_rmr

                              Collapse

                              News

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by SEQadmin2, Today, 02:55 AM
                              0 responses
                              6 views
                              0 reactions
                              Last Post SEQadmin2  
                              Started by SEQadmin2, 07-24-2026, 12:17 PM
                              0 responses
                              11 views
                              0 reactions
                              Last Post SEQadmin2  
                              Started by SEQadmin2, 07-23-2026, 11:41 AM
                              0 responses
                              12 views
                              0 reactions
                              Last Post SEQadmin2  
                              Started by SEQadmin2, 07-20-2026, 11:10 AM
                              0 responses
                              24 views
                              0 reactions
                              Last Post SEQadmin2  
                              Working...