Tweet
Originally posted by GW_OK
View Post
-
Looks like I'll have to eat my hat! Exciting news! -
-
New patent on the exclusion amplification for the X. http://bit.ly/1j6sSll
Just transport the dna fragments slowly and amplify quickly.Providing nextRAD genotyping and PacBio sequencing services. http://snpsaurus.comComment
-
-
See flowcell pics on Twitter @nextgenseekOriginally posted by M4TTN View Post
Fat lanes = different optics
Probably not a typoComment
-
Does fatter lanes = more reagents = more expensive per run?Originally posted by BBoy View Post
It also suggests massive potential for improved performance over time (by increasing cluster density).
We just received a refurb MiSeq in December 2013, so I'm somewhat dismayed by the NextSeq500 release. However 250k is well out of budget.
One wonders if the MiSeq will still get improvements. I notice from the HiSeqX spec sheet that they are now using ordered arrays. I wonder how much of an improvement this could yield on the MiSeq, which already has a very high cluster density.
The two things I'd really like to see is MiSeq hit 100M clusters and the cost of reagents per run to halve.Comment
-
-
I hope illumina will reconsider "10 to a pack" decision for X in future (there can't be more than a handful customers at that level and 3 are already on board).
More than a handful places can use one (or two) X's.Last edited by GenoMax; 01-15-2014, 04:15 AM.Comment
-
-
Interesting idea.Originally posted by GenoMax View Post
Indeed, the relative lack of competition in both CPUs and NGS is a concern for those doing research on a limited budget.
I'd like to see someone reverse engineer a flowcell and compete on reagent costs, but I doubt it will happen.Comment
-
-
I'm thinking their cluster calling algorithm is not quite as robust and/or they're playing it safe with only two images to work with per cycle.Originally posted by Geneus View PostComment
-
Read that, it provides the basic information but not much more.Originally posted by ECO View Post
The one really stupid and highly annoying thing about the Hiseq X is the restriction to only sequence Human genomes (at the $1K 30x cost). It's an entirely arbitrary restriction to increase there profits and nothing else.
Especially seeing it sounds like it's a software based restriction which effectively means they're selling you hardware (expensive hardware) that they've purposefully crippled if you want to do anything other than Human genomes. Highly aggravating hopefully some of the groups that buy the instruments will come up with a work around or means of disabling this restriction, certainly the first service provider who can get a large (~3GB) non-human genome out for ~1K will have plenty of interested buyers (assuming Illumina contractually doesn't prevent this...).Comment
-
I agree this is a stupid restrictions. However, is there a lot of drive to do huge scale, medium depth, WGS on a species other than human? How many 30x mouse genomes can one need?Originally posted by aeonsim View Post
You aren’t going to get a de novo genome with 30x at a single fragment size, at least not one worth much. And the de novo sequencing must make up a tiny fraction of sequencing projects in the world. So, if Illumina is going to have some 5 different machines now, what the problem in having one machine dedicated to large scale human resequencing studies? Maybe the implementation is wrong, but I think the general idea is right, especially from a marketing perspective.Comment
-
I suspect that doing GWAS studies on mice, dogs, etc. could be of interest. It is nice to to have inbred lines but being able to sequence the outbred lines could produce interesting results that can be easily experimentally verified in ways that human experimentation is not allowed.Originally posted by Wallysb01 View Post
Now funding such a study might be difficult. It is one thing to say "$1000 to sequence yourself" versus "$1000 to sequence your pet".
Agreed.You aren’t going to get a de novo genome with 30x at a single fragment size, at least not one worth much.
Yes, I think that is a good point. A year from now after the initial sales have slowed down then perhaps marketing will point towards other species.And the de novo sequencing must make up a tiny fraction of sequencing projects in the world. So, if Illumina is going to have some 5 different machines now, what the problem in having one machine dedicated to large scale human resequencing studies? Maybe the implementation is wrong, but I think the general idea is right, especially from a marketing perspective.Comment
-
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 -
Cancer survival rates have significantly increased in the last few decades in the United States, reaching a combined 70% 5-year survival rate by 2021. Behind this number, there are years of research to find new therapies, drug targets, and early detection methods. But there is one core challenge that keeps slowing down these advances, and it’s about drug resistance.
There is no single reason why many patients don’t respond to treatment as expected. Cancer is...07-08-2026, 05:17 AM -
Love this - good data definitely starts from good input, and poor input can only give relatively poor data. I particularly like the mention of Nanodrop/absorbance based methods for quantification. It's such a toss up if you'll get an accurate reading or what amounts to a randomly generated number, and a lot of library/sequencing related issues can be traced back to poor quant.07-01-2026, 11:43 AM
Comment