SEQanswers

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



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nextera Kit -- DNA fragments too small arilindsey Sample Prep / Library Generation 17 05-29-2015 10:17 AM
SMART-seq2 and Nextera XT DNA sample preparation kit wacguy Sample Prep / Library Generation 9 02-09-2015 02:00 AM
Homogenization in Nextera DNA prep kit sebl Illumina/Solexa 0 03-02-2014 05:40 AM
How to prep BACs for Nextera XT DNA kit? OnUrMark Sample Prep / Library Generation 3 05-20-2013 12:56 PM
input DNA for Illumina´s Nextera XT sample prep kit alpinedna Sample Prep / Library Generation 1 11-05-2012 07:29 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-06-2017, 04:38 AM   #1
Genetic Librarian
Member
 
Location: Europe

Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 22
Default New kit: Nextera DNA-Flex

Hi,
I am sure many of you got the newsletter from Illumina today.
So, apparently the New DNA Flex kit is an all-in-one solution for Nextera XT, Nextera and TruSeq DNA Nano Users.
Main benefit seems to be its tolerance towards input concentrations (so no more super accurate Qubit needed). Main disappointment is the separately sold index set with yet again no full unique dual indexing capability (but at least a columnwise start). They missed a chance here for a really fresh start.

I would be happy to read about your first test results here. We will at least give it a try.

Last edited by Genetic Librarian; 10-06-2017 at 05:12 AM.
Genetic Librarian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2017, 05:44 AM   #2
nucacidhunter
Senior Member
 
Location: Iran

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,083
Default

I wonder if you know how its price compares to standard Nextera or Nextera XT.
nucacidhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2017, 05:51 AM   #3
Genetic Librarian
Member
 
Location: Europe

Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 22
Default

Prices are already up on their website.
Per sample it is more expensive than Nextera XT and TruSeq Nano, but cheaper than Nextera (at least in EURO). So if you use all three kits with bias to Nextera, you would go cheaper, if you mainly use XT, you would pay more.
It needs to be tested how much money you save by not needing to Qubit and savings in hands-on-time.
Genetic Librarian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-06-2017, 06:06 AM   #4
nucacidhunter
Senior Member
 
Location: Iran

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,083
Default

Thanks. Input DNA still needs to be quantified to decide on PCR cycles, though accurate normalization is not necessary.
nucacidhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2017, 07:52 PM   #5
nucacidhunter
Senior Member
 
Location: Iran

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,083
Default

Facts gleaned from Illumina data sheets:
1- Input DNA quantification is required but not accurate normalisation
2- DNA quality will affect the library as does with other Nextera kits and not suitable for FFPE or cfDNA
3- Less flexible for modifying library insert size
4- Comparisons are to Nextera kits or Nano not leading kits that outperform Nano kit
5- Data sheets does not have extensive quality metrics (lacks uniformity of GC coverage information, duplicates for certain read number)
6- Uniform insert size refers to sequenced library fragments not the actual library insert size

Generally, it is less likely to be considered as a technological advance as other supplier’s kits with one tube fragmentation, combined end repair and A tailing followed by ligation are faster or require similar hands on time with the advantage of lower cost and less bias.
nucacidhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2017, 05:27 AM   #6
huguesparri
Member
 
Location: Montpellier (France)

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 90
Default

The kit includes so-called "SPB" (Sample purification Beads) so you don't need AMpure XP anymore (except for an initial hypothetic sample purification).
It might not justify completely the higher price (when compared to Truseq nano and Nextera XT) but it is still to be taken into account...
huguesparri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2017, 04:03 PM   #7
lmj
Junior Member
 
Location: Australia

Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 3
Default

We have tested this kit sequencing bacterial whole genomes with the aim of trying to get improved read distribution compared Nextera XT.

Thoughts on the kit;
1) Super easy to use
2) No normalisation required and distribution of reads across different samples in the library much more even
3) Distribution of reads across the genome is better than Nextera XT, still not perfect but much better
4) While slightly more expensive that NexteraXT I think it actually comes out a but cheaper as you don't need AmpureXP beads and you don't need to run gels on individual samples before pooling.

For us the flex kit is an improvement over Nextera XT
lmj 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 02:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO