SEQanswers

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



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
exome capture kit from Illumina lingfung.tang Sample Prep / Library Generation 1 01-27-2012 04:33 AM
Exome capture validation arvi8689 Genomic Resequencing 2 01-18-2012 02:45 AM
TCGA : capture vs. exome question? Richard Finney Genomic Resequencing 1 09-24-2011 10:50 PM
Illumina TruSeq exome capture Geneus Sample Prep / Library Generation 0 02-17-2011 08:50 AM
Barcode before exome capture upenn_ngs Sample Prep / Library Generation 5 11-01-2010 03:27 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-24-2010, 01:50 PM   #1
Bruce E
Member
 
Location: Rochester,MN

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15
Default Whole Exome Capture

We just finished a GAIIx 76 X 2 PE run of libraries prepared with Agilents Whole exome Sure Select kit. We analysed them using the Illumina Pipeline and aligned them to the human genome. The overall error rate was ~1% but when I look at the error plots the error rate increases rapidly to 5% starting at ~65 cycles on both reads. We looked at the RTA runtime stats charts for the quality and focus and nothing seems to go bad for either read. Has anyone using Exome Capture observed this? Could it be an alignment issue? I was wondering if we may be starting to sequence into the other adapter?
Thanks
Bruce E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2010, 06:23 PM   #2
kmcarr
Senior Member
 
Location: USA, Midwest

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,155
Default

Bruce,

Your result sound quite typical to me. A rising error rate at the end of the read is expected and normal. 5% may be a little higher than I'd like but I'd be perfectly satisfied with that result. The rising error rate has to do with the falling intensity; the signal to noise ratio drops. Focus is not an issue here. Oh, and those Q values reported by RTA are complete fantasy, don't believe them.
kmcarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2010, 07:29 AM   #3
lmf_bill
Member
 
Location: New Haven

Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmcarr View Post
Bruce,

Your result sound quite typical to me. A rising error rate at the end of the read is expected and normal. 5% may be a little higher than I'd like but I'd be perfectly satisfied with that result. The rising error rate has to do with the falling intensity; the signal to noise ratio drops. Focus is not an issue here. Oh, and those Q values reported by RTA are complete fantasy, don't believe them.
nod
what about the 5 primer error rate, it seems due to primer.
lmf_bill 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 06:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO