SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Applications Forums > Sample Prep / Library Generation



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Library quantification: opinions? krobison Sample Prep / Library Generation 41 06-23-2016 06:38 PM
Library quantification suludana Illumina/Solexa 22 10-24-2013 03:52 PM
Illumina library quantification deepakpatilp Illumina/Solexa 75 06-24-2013 09:21 AM
Nanodrop vs bioanalyzer for library quantification k-gun12 Illumina/Solexa 1 09-24-2010 07:26 AM
3'UTR library or random primed cDNA library for quantification? Rosanne82 Sample Prep / Library Generation 0 06-26-2009 05:27 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-03-2011, 02:39 PM   #1
peromhc
Senior Member
 
Location: Durham, NH

Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 108
Default Library Quantification Confusion!

I have just finished making some Illumina mRNA libraries using the v2 TruSeq Kit. I used the QUBIT to quantify samples, and got high concentrations (200-600ng/uL). Bioanalyzer traces suggest that there is a lot of material there, as well, and of the appropriate size.

I contrast, I used the Kapa Bio library quantification kit, and got very different numbers concentrations, ranging from .01-90ng/uL. At the end of library prep, after enrichment PCR, the library should be enriched for dsDNA fragments that have adaptors on both ends, and thus are PCR competent. There should not be a lot of dsDNA floating around I don't think..

So, why such big differences?

Attached you'll see a bioanalyzer trace (1:10 dilution) of a library. QUBIT told me concentration was 321ng/uL, but Kapa qPCR says only .12ng/uL..

Can anybody suggest a reason why this may be?
Attached Files
File Type: pdf macmanes.bioanaly.pdf (192.3 KB, 156 views)
peromhc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2011, 01:12 AM   #2
niceday
Member
 
Location: cambridge

Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 68
Default

do you have quantitation for pre and postPCR enrichment?
DEpending on the number of cycles you should see an increase in the amount of library.
If the increase is low then the amount of properly ligated library is low before PCR or the PCR hasn't worked and you haven't amplified your correctly ligated material over your incorrectly ligated material.
niceday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2011, 01:48 AM   #3
Eric@Kapa
Member
 
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 11
Default

There are many possible explanations for this, but assuming there was nothing wrong with the qPCR assay, I would suggest that you proceed with caution -- the KAPA qPCR primers correspond to the flow cell oligo sequences, so anything that does not amplify during qPCR will not produce clusters on your flow cell.

Without seeing the details of your qPCR assay, it's impossible for me to comment on potential problems. Please feel free to send full details to support@kapabiosystems.com:

* details of how the assay was set up, which qPCR instrument was used, etc.
* screen-captures of amplification profiles for standards and unknowns
* screen-captures of standard curves
* spreadsheet containing data including Ct scores of replicates, calculated concentrations, etc.

Hopefully we can help to shed some light on your problem!

Best regards,

Eric
Eric@Kapa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2011, 04:47 AM   #4
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,317
Default

The simple explanation would be that you generated a large amount of cDNA and that relatively little of it was converted to library molecules. Presuming there was no issue with blunting/A-tailing your ds-cDNAs and ligation went as expected, then the limiting factor would be the amount of adapter available. In another thread the relative concentrations of adapter in the DNA vs RNA kits was determined to be 60:1.

Once the adapter:insert molar conc. ratio drops below 2 you get into problematic territory. That is, if there is only 1 adapter available for each insert molecule, chances of getting a molecule with an adapter on each end drops to 25% (0.5^2).

That said, the 10x difference in concentration between your Agilent chip (30 ng/ul -- taking into account the 1:10 dilution) and your QBIT is mysterious.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2011, 05:57 AM   #5
peromhc
Senior Member
 
Location: Durham, NH

Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 108
Default perhaps more enlightening (see image)

this is a different sample than the one I reference above, but the problem is the same. Note that between the top image (sample before PCR enrichment) and below (after PCR enrichment) that there is obvious peak enhancement.. Despite this, this the qPCR conc. value is very low.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Mystery.jpg (89.7 KB, 98 views)
peromhc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2011, 06:23 AM   #6
HESmith
Senior Member
 
Location: Bethesda MD

Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 506
Default

Did you include a positive control sample (e.g., phiX) in your qPCR? If that value is off, it would indicate a problem with your instrument or reagents.
HESmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2011, 06:23 AM   #7
NextGenSeq
Senior Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 482
Default

Note the small RNA adapters have a mismatch at the 3' end for the KAPA QPCR reatltime PCR primers. This gave us a huge difference in quantification of a small RNA library.

Anyway, double check that the KAPA primers are correct for your library prep.
NextGenSeq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2011, 08:01 AM   #8
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,317
Default

Also, check the calibration on your QBIT.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2011, 05:09 AM   #9
sehrrot
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 58
Default

Yes recalibration for QuBit I would recommend. Even though it's done, QuBit gives not too accurate value and somtimes differs by a type of QuBit.
sehrrot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2011, 07:18 AM   #10
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,317
Default

The OP is getting 100x higher numbers on the QBIT than on the BioAnalyzer. That suggests the a decimal place slip and/or the standards are 100x off.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
illumina, kapa, qubit

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 08:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO