SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > General



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
First gen forum? pmiguel Site Feedback/Suggestions 7 08-03-2019 07:39 PM
New to Next Gen abhagwat Introductions 8 02-09-2012 08:54 AM
GeneProf - Next-Gen Analysis for Next-Gen Data florian Bioinformatics 0 01-30-2012 02:21 AM
Transitioning from Previous-Gen to Next-Gen conrad_halling Introductions 0 05-23-2010 06:58 AM
New to Next-Gen adoust Introductions 0 05-10-2010 01:40 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-03-2010, 01:12 PM   #1
GW_OK
Senior Member
 
Location: Oklahoma

Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 411
Default last gen, next gen, third gen

Here's a thought while I'm waiting for the cBot to finish generating my flowcell:
When does "current generation" become "last generation", and "next generation" become "current generation", and can "third generation" become "next generation"?
Is Sanger still "current generation"?
Will the GA/454/Solid always be "next generation"?
Should we stop saying "current" and "next" and start saying "first" and "second"?
GW_OK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2010, 01:48 PM   #2
NextGenSeq
Senior Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 482
Default

PacBio is considered 3rd generation. However so was Helicos and look what happened to them.
NextGenSeq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2010, 02:01 PM   #3
Baseless
Member
 
Location: Germany

Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 32
Default

No offense, but I keep wondering what makes PacBio a third generation.
It sequences by completing a strand, its massively parallelized...ok, it apparently does not use a PCR, but people have published a PCR-less protocoll for another platform in 2009...
For what we use now, I prefer the term second generation. The downsizing and parallelization really changed the way researchers see the genome. The gap between '2nd' and '3rd' generation wont probably be that big. The next revolution probably needs to be a medical tricorder.
Baseless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2010, 07:28 PM   #4
Michael.James.Clark
Senior Member
 
Location: Palo Alto

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 213
Default

It's funny this comes up, because I just made a huge decision to call it "Second Generation Sequencing" in my dissertation.

"Third generation" refers to single-molecule sequencing technology, which is why PacBio qualifies. I think IonTorrent does too, as does the new tech from LifeTech.

And yes, I've stopped calling Illumina GA/SOLiD/454 "Next Gen" and started calling them "Second Generation", especially in published works because "next gen" is simply too transient a term.
__________________
Mendelian Disorder: A blogshare of random useful information for general public consumption. [Blog]
Breakway: A Program to Identify Structural Variations in Genomic Data [Website] [Forum Post]
Projects: U87MG whole genome sequence [Website] [Paper]
Michael.James.Clark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2010, 08:31 PM   #5
ECO
--Site Admin--
 
Location: SF Bay Area, CA, USA

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,358
Default

IONT is not single molecule AFAIK.

I am contemplating a new tagline for the site, as we clearly can't be "next-gen" forever...so I'm interested to see people's ideas.
ECO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2010, 08:37 PM   #6
Michael.James.Clark
Senior Member
 
Location: Palo Alto

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 213
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ECO View Post
IONT is not single molecule AFAIK.

I am contemplating a new tagline for the site, as we clearly can't be "next-gen" forever...so I'm interested to see people's ideas.
Yeah, it is not single molecule. Did a little snooping after I said that.

Does that mean it qualifies as second-gen? I'm still not so sure. Maybe "single molecule" isn't the only qualifying thing about the term, though.

I would say that single molecule systems definitely do qualify as a new generation of technology, but sort of like how we had a pyrosequencer, a synthesis sequencer and a ligation sequencer in the second gen, multiple techs could show up in the third gen.

It's kind of like videogame consoles, where significantly different techs (e.g. the Xbox, PS2, Gamecube last generation and the 360, PS3, Wii this generation) all get lumped into the same "generation" because they're currently competing with one another.

ECO, I actually think you might be okay leaving "next generation" in the tag line. I mean, we are always going to be discussing the "next generation" (plus some of the last generation, probably).
__________________
Mendelian Disorder: A blogshare of random useful information for general public consumption. [Blog]
Breakway: A Program to Identify Structural Variations in Genomic Data [Website] [Forum Post]
Projects: U87MG whole genome sequence [Website] [Paper]
Michael.James.Clark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2010, 05:23 AM   #7
kmcarr
Senior Member
 
Location: USA, Midwest

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,165
Default

We just had a meeting with an Ion Torrent rep; I would say it straddles the line between second and third gen. It borrows heavily from the 454 chemistry which is not surprising since both technologies were developed and both companies founded by the same person, Jonathan Rothberg. With both platforms you ligate adapters to fragmented DNA and then clonally amplify on beads using an emulsion PCR. The fundamental difference between 454 and Ion Torrent is instead of linking the incorporation of a nucleotide to the apyrase cascade they directly measure the change in pH resulting from release of the H+ from the 3' end of the nascent chain.

I would say that the fundamental aspects of second-gen sequencing are:
- Sequencing-by-synthesis on isolated groups of clonally amplified templates.

- All nucleotide incorporation is synchronous and occurs one nucleotide at a time.

- Alternating phases of nucleotide incorporation and signal detection.
The way I see third-gen:
- Sequencing-by-synthesis of single molecules.

- Nucleotide incorporation occurs asynchronously, in "real-time". (Lets save the debate of PacBio calling 5 nucleotides per second "real-time".)

- Both nucleotide incorporation and signal detection occur continuously.
The Ion Torrent technology is second-gen by the first criterion but third-gen by criteria 2 and 3.

EDIT:
As was pointed out down thread, nucleotide incorporation in the Ion Torrent is one base at a time, just like the 454. I don't know what I was thinking, maybe the coffee hadn't kicked in. So according to my thesis then then Ion Torrent would be a solidly in second-gen territory.

Last edited by kmcarr; 08-04-2010 at 01:01 PM. Reason: Correct really shocking mistake regarding the way Ion Torrent works.
kmcarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2010, 05:30 AM   #8
steven
Senior Member
 
Location: Southern France

Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael.James.Clark View Post
ECO, I actually think you might be okay leaving "next generation" in the tag line. I mean, we are always going to be discussing the "next generation" (plus some of the last generation, probably).
ha ha, that's exactly what i thought too
steven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2010, 06:09 AM   #9
mgogol
Senior Member
 
Location: Kansas City

Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 197
Default

I think we should just call all the new (non-sanger) stuff "high-throughput sequencing."

If you are referring to a specific brand, just name it, but in terms of data and cost I don't feel like it's as huge of a change from "2nd" to "3rd" to justify recognizing it with a new moniker.

My .02.
mgogol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2010, 06:40 AM   #10
GW_OK
Senior Member
 
Location: Oklahoma

Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 411
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ECO View Post
IONT is not single molecule AFAIK.

I am contemplating a new tagline for the site, as we clearly can't be "next-gen" forever...so I'm interested to see people's ideas.
I suppose we always will be the next generation sequencing community as long as everyone keeps upgrading tech, but maybe we should be the high-throughput sequencing community? I don't know, that doesn't quite give the same sort of panache.
I like "First Gen" for Sanger, "Second Gen" for what's out now (the "next gen") and "Third Gen" for true single molecule stuff. So, PacBio is Third, Ion is Second.
GW_OK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2010, 06:48 AM   #11
mgogol
Senior Member
 
Location: Kansas City

Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 197
Default

Maybe we should take a tip from Star Trek. After Next generation comes Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and Enterprise.
mgogol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2010, 07:15 AM   #12
kmcarr
Senior Member
 
Location: USA, Midwest

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,165
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgogol View Post
Maybe we should take a tip from Star Trek. After Next generation comes Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and Enterprise.
But if we stay true to the timeline then Enterprise would be casting our own gels and using radiolabeled nucleotides
kmcarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2010, 12:40 PM   #13
krobison
Senior Member
 
Location: Boston area

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 747
Default

Doesn't the Ion Torrent technology rely on pulses of nucleotides just like 454? In that sense it is not "real time".

perhaps a better term than "real time" is "continuous data acquisition" -- this distinguishes PacBio and LifeTech/Visigen from any of the extant platforms (and Ion Torrent, if I'm correct)
krobison is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2010, 12:56 PM   #14
kmcarr
Senior Member
 
Location: USA, Midwest

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,165
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by krobison View Post
Doesn't the Ion Torrent technology rely on pulses of nucleotides just like 454? In that sense it is not "real time".

perhaps a better term than "real time" is "continuous data acquisition" -- this distinguishes PacBio and LifeTech/Visigen from any of the extant platforms (and Ion Torrent, if I'm correct)
You're correct. I don't know what I was thinking of when I wrote that. I'll amend the original post.
kmcarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 05:03 AM   #15
flxlex
Moderator
 
Location: Oslo, Norway

Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 415
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgogol View Post
I think we should just call all the new (non-sanger) stuff "high-throughput sequencing."
Sequencing centers with massive numbers of capillary sequencer were (are?) sequencing at high-throughput also, IMO. So, I vote for sticking with 'Next-Generation'...
flxlex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 06:49 PM   #16
krobison
Senior Member
 
Location: Boston area

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 747
Default

"Next Generation" does have a nicer ring to it than "Markedly Faster than Last Year (but wait until next year)"
krobison is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 07:52 PM   #17
ECO
--Site Admin--
 
Location: SF Bay Area, CA, USA

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,358
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by krobison View Post
"Next Generation" does have a nicer ring to it than "Markedly Faster than Last Year (but wait until next year)"
Winner!

SEQanswers: The Markedly Faster than Last Year Sequencing Community
ECO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 07:47 AM   #18
GW_OK
Senior Member
 
Location: Oklahoma

Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 411
Default

I like it, too. "All samples will undergo Markedly Faster Than Last Year sequencing to identify rare variants".
GW_OK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 07:53 AM   #19
steven
Senior Member
 
Location: Southern France

Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 269
Default

the acronym is not the sexiest though..
steven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2010, 11:08 AM   #20
Joann
Senior Member
 
Location: Woodbridge CT

Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 231
Default LBP sequencing

OK, so how about LBP (little bitty pieces) sequencing?
Joann 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 05:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO