![]() |
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
RNA-seq in the NovaSeq | scrosby | RNA Sequencing | 2 | 03-09-2018 09:19 AM |
NovaSeq Experience | nangel | Illumina/Solexa | 26 | 11-02-2017 10:15 PM |
NovaSeq from Illumina | GenoMax | Illumina/Solexa | 113 | 08-03-2017 04:51 AM |
Puzzing MiSeq run (failure) | Vesperholly2 | Illumina/Solexa | 1 | 11-15-2014 01:44 PM |
MiSeq run failure - inhibition? | firefly2280 | Illumina/Solexa | 24 | 11-14-2014 08:13 PM |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#1 |
Junior Member
Location: Israel Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3
|
![]()
Hi all,
This is the first time I'm trying to run a MIP (molecular inversion probe) library of ~800 genomic targets, dual index library in Novaseq. The primers we use are custom primers for all reads (R1, R2, Ind). The Miseq run of the same pool looked like this (Miseq1, Miseq2 figures), while there was a fall in the first 50 bases of both R1 and R2 in the Novaseq run (Novaseq1, Novaseq2). Has anyone had any encounter with such phenomena and can suggest how to solve it? I heard an explanation of low hybridization efficiency of the custom primers in the Novaseq, but how can this explain the rest of the sequencing process? Also, I'll be glad to hear from satisfied/non-satisfied Novaseq users general experience compared to other machines (namely Hiseq). Many thanks! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,317
|
![]()
The new version of SAV has a metric "% occupancy" for each tile. You should check that.
It looks like you either had very low occupancy (very under-clustered) or very massive over-clustering. (Actually I think the NovaSeq is pretty resistant to over-clustering.) I personally would be terrified to use custom primers on an S4 flowcell. Actually we never used them even once on our previous instrument (HiSeq 2500). -- Phillip |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Location: East Coast USA Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7,080
|
![]()
MiSeq is the champ of sequencing difficult libraries. I would not compare success on a MiSeq to a different sequencer for odd libraries. If you are running an un-supported application then you are on your own when you push the bounds of technology.
When you stay within bounds of supported applications NovaSeq performs very well. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Junior Member
Location: paris Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8
|
![]()
Which version of SAV enables to see the % occupancy per tile. How can you check if the loading concentration looks good?
Many thanks! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | ||
Junior Member
Location: Israel Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3
|
![]()
Thanks for your replies!
Quote:
Quote:
I was told that the intensities are low, which may resulted in faulty results. Any thoughts about that? |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Senior Member
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,317
|
![]() Quote:
-- Phillip |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Location: Oklahoma Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 411
|
![]()
One thing worth keeping in mind as well is the difference in clustering chemistries between the two instruments. With the Nova using ExAmp and the Miseq using the "classic" bridge amplification the same library may (and probably will) cluster differently between them. We were actually warned by our FAS during our Nova install to not QC pools on a Miseq Nano prior to a large Nova flowcell and instead run on an iSeq since it also uses ExAmp.
I'm wondering if your poor Nova run was due to presence of adapter/primer dimer, which can easily take over with ExAmp. Do you have an electropherogram of the library and/or FastQC results showing adapter dimer or insert size metrics? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Junior Member
Location: Israel Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3
|
![]()
Hi all,
As a followup on this issue (I owe it to the generous people here). I ran the same library in Miniseq which has similar temperature properties and it looked really good. As a final step, I noticed the sequencing provider had some technical issues, including not supplying coherent answers as for what they did, and moreover, were unclear of what they suggest to do (at the end, they said they will rerun with addition of Phix and mix standard and custom primers). I chose to run in a different facility which supplies excellent support even before sending samples. The run had great QC, similar to the Miseq data (!) with S2 chip, yielding 3.7B reads. Bottom line, Novaseq can do custom primers. And sometimes you should be lucky when selecting the provider (both sequencing provider have reputation and certificates etc.). See attached figures for the successful Novaseq run (see posts before to compare). Best. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Senior Member
Location: East Coast USA Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7,080
|
![]()
I am glad things worked to your satisfaction. Thanks for providing a final update.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
miseq, novaseq |
Thread Tools | |
|
|