SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Applications Forums > Epigenetics



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which Bioanalyzer DNA Chip? lac302 Sample Prep / Library Generation 1 05-19-2014 11:08 AM
odd total RNA pattern bioanalyzer eab Sample Prep / Library Generation 18 08-18-2012 04:54 AM
autocorrelation pattern in ChIP-seq alignments skip56558 Bioinformatics 6 02-28-2012 02:24 PM
Identical ChIP Seq pattern for different histone abs obischof Bioinformatics 11 06-20-2011 05:11 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-08-2016, 07:45 AM   #1
Postdoc_Rach
Junior Member
 
Location: Italy

Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 4
Default ChIP Bioanalyzer pattern mystery... \o/

Hello ChIP-Seq community, I have pored over all the ChIP Bioanalyzer posts without finding an answer, and now I ask any advice from those of you with experience. Attached is a PDF of the Bioanalyzer results of my latest ChIP-Seq libraries, including Input, 9C/9D (tech replicates) and 27C/27D (tech replicates).

For these, one chromatin sample was crosslinked, sheared in a Bioruptor, and aliquoted into the appropriate antibody tubes.

After de-crosslinking/Prot. K, there were two methods of purification (to test the respective yields). Input, 9D and 27D were purified with 1.8 volumes of Ampure XP. Meanwhile, 9C and 27C were purified with the spin column that came with our ChIP kit. Libraries were produced in an identical manner for all DNAs using a kit, with similar amounts of starting DNA for each.

It seems to me that the "artifact" seen in 9C and 27C must arise from the column purification, but how this would translate to differences in the final library considering the adapter-ligated fragments are bead-purified before PCR? If it were a cross-linking effect, I would expect to see it in both replicates, so I assume it is a bubble product. (And therefore not terribly important, but this is driving me nuts.)

Any ideas greatly appreciated, thank you.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Bioanalyzer_March_2nd.pdf (130.2 KB, 58 views)
Postdoc_Rach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2016, 02:02 PM   #2
nucacidhunter
Jafar Jabbari
 
Location: Melbourne

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,179
Default

Not a straight answer but questions:
1- Extension time during PCR
2- Number of PCR cycles
3- Are these purified PCR’s profiles
4- Has 9D and 27D been amplified? They look exactly as the input with higher concentration which is not expected.
nucacidhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2016, 11:39 PM   #3
Postdoc_Rach
Junior Member
 
Location: Italy

Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 4
Default

Thanks very much for the reply, Nucacidhunter.

Yes, you are looking at around 0.3 to 0.5 ng of purified (amplified) libraries here. The input sample was very concentrated and so was diluted 100-fold (perhaps too much) before loading on the Bioanalyzer chip, which is why the signal is so low.

For these libraries we use the Nugen Ultralow kit, and I used the amplification program in the protocol, which was 15 cycles and with an extension step of 30 seconds. Libraries are purified again with AmpureXP beads, and they were placed on a magnet while pipetting out for the BA chip.

We've sequenced libraries that look like the C samples (with the large peak at 3K) and they seem to have worked well enough in our limited experience. But, I have no good explanation for how the Ampure bead ChIP purification would change the library appearance so much.

If any obvious sequencing differences arise, I will post them here!
Postdoc_Rach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 01:16 AM   #4
nucacidhunter
Jafar Jabbari
 
Location: Melbourne

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,179
Default

Your PCRs cut off with bead is similar at around 200bp in all libraries as expected. I am not sure that bubble is the cause of 9C and 27C large amplicons because there should be another smaller peak. Could it be that smaller fragments have been lost during column purification? I assume the input shown in the PDF is from bead purified input not the column ones.
nucacidhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 02:04 AM   #5
Postdoc_Rach
Junior Member
 
Location: Italy

Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 4
Default

Yes, that was also my (only) idea, that maybe the column somehow is losing the small fragments, leaving only larger ones to amplify.

Then the question becomes, what kind of defective spin column (included with a ChIP kit, no less) can't retain 200-1000 bp fragments, and where are the larger fragments in the AmpureXP samples? If I'm not mistaken, a 1.8x volume should retain nearly everything.

You are correct that the input was bead purified, although other times I have phenol/chloroform extracted the input and obtained the same size distribution. One time the input was column-purified, and the yield was appallingly poor (but normal-sized); I credited it to operator error, but maybe the columns are suspect after all.

In any case, this may be one of those things for which we just have to shrug and go forward. I sure will let you know how the sequencing goes though.

Thanks for your time and thoughts, Nucacidhunter! I am the only molecular biology researcher in our group, so it's a rare treat to bounce around ideas about the nuts and bolts of bench science.
Postdoc_Rach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 03:08 AM   #6
Postdoc_Rach
Junior Member
 
Location: Italy

Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 4
Default Results are in

Hello all, the sequencing results are in. The difference between the C and D samples is that the C samples contain a sizeable bacterial contamination while the D samples do not.

That said, although they do correlate, I do not claim for sure that the bacterial DNA directly resulted in the Caliper graph differences.

As far as IP purification protocol differences go, my guess is that the AmpureXP ethanol washes in the D samples killed the bacteria off before going into library prep.

We will definitely use new IP reagents for the next round. Hope this helps someone down the line.
Postdoc_Rach 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 05:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO