Tweet
A while back ECO posted some great info on a 1x300 miseq run. Has anybody tried a similar run with an upgraded instrument to achieve a 500 nt read? Will the software permit this? How do the base qualities trail off?
-
-
I dont see how it would. If the sum of your amplicon is shorter than that of your paired ends you can join them based on a region of overlap -
We've done several 1x300 runs with 300 cycle kits, and there is a noticeable dropoff in quality after ~base 250 on good runs. I can't imagine that a 1x500 run would give you more than ~300 bases of usable data.Comment
-
The 1x300 runs you are referring to were likely done with v.1 kits?Originally posted by bbeitzel View Post
It is great if koadman is willing to sacrifice a v.2 kit and enlighten all on two things: if the 1 x 500 will work and where the drop-off in qualities can be expected to start.Comment
-
Well of course I was hoping not to be the sacrificial lamb, but if nobody else has tried this and able to share data I guess I will take one for the team! Now just need to find a willing pair of lab hands here in Sydney...Comment
-
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
-
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...
Comment