Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • hoytpr
    Member
    • Dec 2009
    • 62

    Small RNA library with 200bp extra peak

    I just looked at our new small RNA library submitted by a respected lab on the Bioanalyzer. The small RNA library should be about 178, and it's there, but most of the samples have a broader but distinct peak at 200bp. I've posted a link to an example below. Any ideas what this could be and even more, how to eliminate it?

    Thanks.
    Pete
  • sbarberan
    Member
    • Feb 2017
    • 17

    #2
    That to me looks like over-amplification, we have seen 'bulged' products that run at 200-250bp. See page 9 of this protocol from the Mello lab (http://www.lsi.umich.edu/files/SmallRNACloning.pdf)

    What kit was used to prepare the libraries? 178 is big for miRNAs unless you are using QIAseq.

    Cheers,
    sergio

    Comment

    • hoytpr
      Member
      • Dec 2009
      • 62

      #3
      You're right, that does resemble over amplification. I was going to run the samples on a denaturing gel but that protocol says not to. Can it be fixed? I think the protocol was mostly custom. I'm not someone who makes small RNA libraries yet, so I can't really comment on what was custom and what may have come from a kit.
      Last edited by hoytpr; 02-12-2018, 04:51 PM.

      Comment

      • sbarberan
        Member
        • Feb 2017
        • 17

        #4
        Bulged products are not a problem for sequencing, you only see them with gels or bioanalyzer. For sequencing you denature the libraries anyways. So there is nothing to fix, just that they probably amplified the libraries for too many cycles.

        Comment

        • hoytpr
          Member
          • Dec 2009
          • 62

          #5
          Originally posted by sbarberan View Post
          Bulged products are not a problem for sequencing, you only see them with gels or bioanalyzer. For sequencing you denature the libraries anyways. So there is nothing to fix, just that they probably amplified the libraries for too many cycles.
          So, you'd have to quantify by QPCR then, as fluorescence or Bioanalyzers won't tell you the number of correctly formatted sequences with adapters?

          Comment

          • sbarberan
            Member
            • Feb 2017
            • 17

            #6
            You are probably right that qPCR will be the only way to quantify with 100% accuracy, but generally we do not use qPCR and even with libraries with bulged products we manage to quantify only with Qubit and Bioanalyzer and get great pooling.

            Alternatively you can also try to denature the sample before loading into the Bioanalyzer.

            Comment

            Latest Articles

            Collapse

            • 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
            • SEQadmin2
              Cancer Drug Resistance: The Lingering Barrier to Rising Survival
              by SEQadmin2



              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
            • GATTACAT
              Reply to Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
              by GATTACAT
              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

            ad_right_rmr

            Collapse

            News

            Collapse

            Topics Statistics Last Post
            Started by SEQadmin2, Today, 10:26 AM
            0 responses
            10 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 07-09-2026, 10:04 AM
            0 responses
            24 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 07-08-2026, 10:08 AM
            0 responses
            16 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 07-07-2026, 11:05 AM
            0 responses
            33 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Working...