SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Sequencing Technologies/Companies > Illumina/Solexa



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Expired MiSeq reagent kit microgirl123 Illumina/Solexa 17 12-08-2016 04:22 AM
MiSeq Reagent kit v3 exo Illumina/Solexa 15 01-14-2014 06:42 PM
Bad MiSeq Reagent Kits mcnelson.phd Illumina/Solexa 13 02-25-2013 01:12 AM
Found an eyelash in my sealed MiSeq Reagent cartridge amba Illumina/Solexa 5 10-12-2012 06:12 AM
Blocking oligos in MiSeq kit LSAD Sample Prep / Library Generation 0 04-13-2012 01:09 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-17-2013, 11:59 PM   #1
paolo.kunder
Member
 
Location: Milano, Italy

Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 92
Default MiSeq Reagent Kit v3

Hello!
Has anyone tried to perform RNA-Seq and ChIP-Seq with the new MiSeq Reagent Kit v3?
What about the throughput?
Any feedback?
Thanks
Paolo
paolo.kunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2013, 10:12 AM   #2
MadsAlbertsen
Member
 
Location: Denmark

Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26
Default

We just did some stranded RNAseq libraries with MiSeq v3 kits.

Worked perfectly. 1340 k/mm^2 density and 32M reads (29M passed).

rgds
Mads
MadsAlbertsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 07:04 AM   #3
yaximik
Senior Member
 
Location: Alabama

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 203
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadsAlbertsen View Post
We just did some stranded RNAseq libraries with MiSeq v3 kits.

Worked perfectly. 1340 k/mm^2 density and 32M reads (29M passed).

rgds
Mads
I found 2 protocols on library loading, which differ greatly in load ranges. One starts from 10 nM libraries and provides dilution tables from 20 pM to 50 pM final library concentrations - without giving any hints at least what to start from to get 1200-1400 cluster density. Another manual starts from 4 nM library and provides dilution tables up to 20 pM final library concentration - again without a clue what to use to get to the new higher density. Which is correct manual?
My libraries are made from fragmented DNA, so I started from 10 nM library and diluted to final 25 pM according to the first protocol. I got only ~930 density. So, the entire range in the second protocol would lead to underutilization of v3 capabilities. Any comments from other experiences?

Last edited by yaximik; 09-21-2013 at 06:10 PM.
yaximik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 06:09 PM   #4
yaximik
Senior Member
 
Location: Alabama

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 203
Default

All right, I did another run with the same library using the first protocol, but loaded the flow cell at ~33 pM instead of 25 pM as in the previous run. I got density up to 1144 with 85.2% PF as compared to density of 928 with PF 88% at 25 pM library load. Looks like the protocol 1 is the way to go.

Last edited by yaximik; 09-21-2013 at 06:13 PM.
yaximik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2013, 11:02 PM   #5
MadsAlbertsen
Member
 
Location: Denmark

Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yaximik View Post
All right, I did another run with the same library using the first protocol, but loaded the flow cell at ~33 pM instead of 25 pM as in the previous run. I got density up to 1144 with 85.2% PF as compared to density of 928 with PF 88% at 25 pM library load. Looks like the protocol 1 is the way to go.
Nice to see that you got it to work. We use the new loading reccomendations of 20 pM. However it is very difficult to estimate the right concentration of the samples due to the differences in insert length although we run all samples on a TapeStation. We are usually happy if we hit +/- 20 % of the density we aimed for.

rgds
Mads
MadsAlbertsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO