Hi! I have 24 ATAC libraries prepared for sequencing. For this, I want to pool them all together. I ran them on the TapeStation and I have the distinctive nucleosomal banding pattern (see attached files). I'm hesitating a bit on how to properly estimate the molarity of every library when I have multiple bands, since the Tape is not always detecting the same bands. Any suggestion about this? Should I just use Qubit quantification for pooling?
Unconfigured Ad
Collapse
X
-
Use Region Analysis on the TapeStation software instead of Peak Analysis to determine an average size for each sample. Set up a Region from ~150-1000bp on all samples and use that calculate the average size. Use this average size and Qubit measurements for each to then calculate a molar concentration for each library.Originally posted by ECorrales View PostHi! I have 24 ATAC libraries prepared for sequencing. For this, I want to pool them all together. I ran them on the TapeStation and I have the distinctive nucleosomal banding pattern (see attached files). I'm hesitating a bit on how to properly estimate the molarity of every library when I have multiple bands, since the Tape is not always detecting the same bands. Any suggestion about this? Should I just use Qubit quantification for pooling?
Before you do this though, correct the Upper Marker in wells E1, A2, C2, F2 and G2 in the 10-24 file. The Upper Marker should be manually set tot he taller of the two peaks (Upper Marker peak height should alway be almost 2X the Lower Marker peak height.)
-
-
Thank you for your reply. Would you say these peaks corresponds to the upper marker? I was assuming they were larger un-tagmented regions, so I was planning to do a second size selection round with Ampure beads to remove these peaks. But if these are the markers then a second size selection might be unnecessary.Originally posted by kmcarr View PostBefore you do this though, correct the Upper Marker in wells E1, A2, C2, F2 and G2 in the 10-24 file. The Upper Marker should be manually set tot he taller of the two peaks (Upper Marker peak height should alway be almost 2X the Lower Marker peak height.)
Comment
-
-
What I am saying is that for those 5 lanes I mentioned there are 2 very closely spaced peaks, one labeled as a peak of ~1,260-1,270bp and the peak just after that labeled as the Upper marker. The software has incorrectly identified the later migrating peak as the Upper marker. In the TapeStation analysis software you should select the peak which is labeled ~1,270 and manually set that as the upper marker. If you do not correct the upper marker then the size calculation for these lanes will be incorrect.Originally posted by ECorrales View PostThank you for your reply. Would you say these peaks corresponds to the upper marker? I was assuming they were larger un-tagmented regions, so I was planning to do a second size selection round with Ampure beads to remove these peaks. But if these are the markers then a second size selection might be unnecessary.
Comment
-
-
Oh, I see. Thank you so very much for clarifying it!Originally posted by kmcarr View PostWhat I am saying is that for those 5 lanes I mentioned there are 2 very closely spaced peaks, one labeled as a peak of ~1,260-1,270bp and the peak just after that labeled as the Upper marker. The software has incorrectly identified the later migrating peak as the Upper marker. In the TapeStation analysis software you should select the peak which is labeled ~1,270 and manually set that as the upper marker. If you do not correct the upper marker then the size calculation for these lanes will be incorrect.
Comment
-
Latest Articles
Collapse
-
by GATTACATLove 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.
-
Channel: Articles
07-01-2026, 11:43 AM -
-
by SEQadmin2
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...-
Channel: Articles
-
ad_right_rmr
Collapse
News
Collapse
| Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 11:08 AM
|
0 responses
7 views
0 reactions
|
Last Post
by SEQadmin2
Yesterday, 11:08 AM
|
||
|
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
|
0 responses
11 views
0 reactions
|
Last Post
by SEQadmin2
06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
|
||
|
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
|
0 responses
19 views
0 reactions
|
Last Post
by SEQadmin2
06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
|
||
|
Whole-Genome Sequencing Traces Faroe Islands Ancestry to a North Atlantic Founder Population
by SEQadmin2
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
|
0 responses
53 views
0 reactions
|
Last Post
by SEQadmin2
06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
|
Comment