Hi all,
We would like to ask your opinion on this issue. I'm sure that people is more used to thinking about this than we are.
We are designing our own barcodes so they are as short as possible. We made them so that they have enough redundancy to easily discard any non barcoded sequence, and so that no mutation will make one barcode transform into another.
The result is a set of 12 3-bases barcodes (plus the extra T necessary for the ligation, so 4 bases total). We are pretty confident that that's what we want to use, but, for what we have seen, no one is using barcodes this short.
Can anyone come out with a reason for not using these barcodes?
Any help is very much appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
-Pepe
We would like to ask your opinion on this issue. I'm sure that people is more used to thinking about this than we are.
We are designing our own barcodes so they are as short as possible. We made them so that they have enough redundancy to easily discard any non barcoded sequence, and so that no mutation will make one barcode transform into another.
The result is a set of 12 3-bases barcodes (plus the extra T necessary for the ligation, so 4 bases total). We are pretty confident that that's what we want to use, but, for what we have seen, no one is using barcodes this short.
Can anyone come out with a reason for not using these barcodes?
Any help is very much appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
-Pepe
Comment