Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DNA fragmentation methods

    Hi all,
    Different physical damages are made to DNA during sonication. Yet, we all use Covaris and other similar sonicators for library prep.
    I would like to know how many of my colleagues have observed or even looked at the DNA state and what you think of potential alternatives to shearing.
    Kamran
    Kamran SHAZAND, PhD

  • #2
    NEB has an enzyme called Fragmentase for this purpose. Maybe one of many alternatives.
    This product generates dsDNA breaks randomly in a time-dependent manner to yield 50-1,000 bp DNA fragments depending on reaction time.

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes thank you, I know Fragmentase, but since it is mainly based on restriction enzymes, the output has some bias. What other "many alternatives" are you refering to?
      Kamran SHAZAND, PhD

      Comment


      • #4
        The transposase protocols (nextera et al.) are the other alternative, of course also with some biases.
        In general I guess/assume sonication will not introduce any significant biases ( I do not know if anybody has looked at it); at least not to a degree that they will not be trumped by biases of the required downstream enzymatic processes. If you can create your libraries PCR-free after sonication you should have very few worries.

        Originally posted by kshazand View Post
        Yes thank you, I know Fragmentase, but since it is mainly based on restriction enzymes, the output has some bias. What other "many alternatives" are you refering to?

        Comment


        • #5
          kshazand,
          Fragmentase is enzyme based but does not use restriction enzyme.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by luc View Post
            The transposase protocols (nextera et al.) are the other alternative, of course also with some biases.
            In general I guess/assume sonication will not introduce any significant biases ( I do not know if anybody has looked at it); at least not to a degree that they will not be trumped by biases of the required downstream enzymatic processes. If you can create your libraries PCR-free after sonication you should have very few worries.
            luc,
            Ppl looked into sonicated DNA and it does have all sorts of damages, hence my question.
            Kamran SHAZAND, PhD

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by rnaeye View Post
              kshazand,
              Fragmentase is enzyme based but does not use restriction enzyme.
              What enzymes are they then?
              Kamran SHAZAND, PhD

              Comment


              • #8
                I believe you need to ask that to NEB.

                Comment


                • #9

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    6 Methods to Fragment DNA or RNA for NGS

                    These are the 6 main methods used to fragment DNA or RNA for NGS: http://blog.genohub.com/fragmentatio...-library-prep/

                    I'd be interested to see if there have been any detailed studies comparing the bias introduced by each of these.

                    - Genohub

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by kshazand View Post
                      luc,
                      Ppl looked into sonicated DNA and it does have all sorts of damages, hence my question.
                      Hi kshazand,

                      I would be interested in data related to this. Could you point me to them?

                      The Knierim et al paper touches mostly on outdated methods:
                      Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technologies are gaining importance in the routine clinical diagnostic setting. It is thus desirable to simplify the workflow for high-throughput diagnostics. Fragmentation of DNA is a crucial step for preparation of template libraries and various methods are currently known. Here we evaluated the performance of nebulization, sonication and random enzymatic digestion of long-range PCR products on the results of NGS. All three methods produced high-quality sequencing libraries for the 454 platform. However, if long-range PCR products of different length were pooled equimolarly, sequence coverage drastically dropped for fragments below 3,000 bp. All three methods performed equally well with regard to overall sequence quality (PHRED) and read length. Enzymatic fragmentation showed highest consistency between three library preparations but performed slightly worse than sonication and nebulization with regard to insertions/deletions in the raw sequence reads. After filtering for homopolymer errors, enzymatic fragmentation performed best if compared to the results of classic Sanger sequencing. As the overall performance of all three methods was equal with only minor differences, a fragmentation method can be chosen solely according to lab facilities, feasibility and experimental design.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Interesting paper examines transcriptome reassembly and determines it is sensitive to RNA fragmentation technique. Concludes that Zn mediated fragmentation provides a better transcript ID compared to cleavage by RNase III: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...46202313000789

                        I wonder if this has been tested with Mg.

                        - Genohub

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Another interesting paper on Non-random DNA fragmentation in next-generation sequencing: http://www.nature.com/srep/2014/1403...srep04532.html

                          - Genohub

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Thanks a lot for the links Genohub!

                            I have the impression, the authors of this specific paper have completely forgotten about any base-specific biases of enzymes involved in end-repair, A-tailing, and ligation.

                            E.g. ligation bias:
                            Ancient DNA extracts consist of a mixture of endogenous molecules and contaminant DNA templates, often originating from environmental microbes. These two populations of templates exhibit different chemical characteristics, with the former showing depurination and cytosine deamination by-products, resulting from post-mortem DNA damage. Such chemical modifications can interfere with the molecular tools used for building second-generation DNA libraries, and limit our ability to fully characterize the true complexity of ancient DNA extracts. In this study, we first use fresh DNA extracts to demonstrate that library preparation based on adapter ligation at AT-overhangs are biased against DNA templates starting with thymine residues, contrarily to blunt-end adapter ligation. We observe the same bias on fresh DNA extracts sheared on Bioruptor, Covaris and nebulizers. This contradicts previous reports suggesting that this bias could originate from the methods used for shearing DNA. This also suggests that AT-overhang adapter ligation efficiency is affected in a sequence-dependent manner and results in an uneven representation of different genomic contexts. We then show how this bias could affect the base composition of ancient DNA libraries prepared following AT-overhang ligation, mainly by limiting the ability to ligate DNA templates starting with thymines and therefore deaminated cytosines. This results in particular nucleotide misincorporation damage patterns, deviating from the signature generally expected for authenticating ancient sequence data. Consequently, we show that models adequate for estimating post-mortem DNA damage levels must be robust to the molecular tools used for building ancient DNA libraries.



                            Originally posted by Genohub View Post
                            Another interesting paper on Non-random DNA fragmentation in next-generation sequencing: http://www.nature.com/srep/2014/1403...srep04532.html

                            - Genohub

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I'm aware of the RNA ligase biases in small RNA / RNA-Seq. Have you seen any papers about T4 DNA Ligase bias in DNA-Seq applications. I don't think this has been looked at as carefully. If anyone has used 'in-line' adapter barcodes during ligation, they may be in a unique position to comment.

                              - Genohub

                              Comment

                              Latest Articles

                              Collapse

                              • seqadmin
                                Essential Discoveries and Tools in Epitranscriptomics
                                by seqadmin


                                The field of epigenetics has traditionally concentrated more on DNA and how changes like methylation and phosphorylation of histones impact gene expression and regulation. However, our increased understanding of RNA modifications and their importance in cellular processes has led to a rise in epitranscriptomics research. “Epitranscriptomics brings together the concepts of epigenetics and gene expression,” explained Adrien Leger, PhD, Principal Research Scientist on Modified Bases...
                                Yesterday, 07:01 AM
                              • seqadmin
                                Current Approaches to Protein Sequencing
                                by seqadmin


                                Proteins are often described as the workhorses of the cell, and identifying their sequences is key to understanding their role in biological processes and disease. Currently, the most common technique used to determine protein sequences is mass spectrometry. While still a valuable tool, mass spectrometry faces several limitations and requires a highly experienced scientist familiar with the equipment to operate it. Additionally, other proteomic methods, like affinity assays, are constrained...
                                04-04-2024, 04:25 PM

                              ad_right_rmr

                              Collapse

                              News

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by seqadmin, 04-11-2024, 12:08 PM
                              0 responses
                              39 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seqadmin  
                              Started by seqadmin, 04-10-2024, 10:19 PM
                              0 responses
                              41 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seqadmin  
                              Started by seqadmin, 04-10-2024, 09:21 AM
                              0 responses
                              35 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seqadmin  
                              Started by seqadmin, 04-04-2024, 09:00 AM
                              0 responses
                              55 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post seqadmin  
                              Working...
                              X