Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Carcharodon View Post
    I see! Well, I'd recommend using a ratio slightly less than 1.8x. I'd lower that to 1.5x or so and see if it makes a difference (30 uL AmpureXP to 20 uL ladder dilution).
    Thanks. I have chosen this ratio because I am planning to do 16s rRNA amplicon sequencing so I have 96 samples and I will do nested PCR. So what do you think about this ?
    Many thanks

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by hssalgh2 View Post
      Thanks. I have chosen this ratio because I am planning to do 16s rRNA amplicon sequencing so I have 96 samples and I will do nested PCR. So what do you think about this ?
      Many thanks
      I don't think it should be much of a problem, unless I'm misunderstanding something. If the lower ratio is a concern, I would recommend taking one (or a few) of your PCR products and trying both ratios on them, running them out on a gel.

      So on the gel you would run:

      1) PCR Product w/o cleanup
      2) PCR Product w/ cleanup at 1.8x
      3) PCR Product w/ cleanup at 1.5x

      ...and see if there's a difference.

      It's a bit of extra work, but it's a small price to pay for peace of mind. This approach may also be better than testing on a ladder, since you'll be working with the PCR products directly (rather than with a ladder which may or may not have an inhibitory effect on the SPRI beads).

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Carcharodon View Post
        I don't think it should be much of a problem, unless I'm misunderstanding something. If the lower ratio is a concern, I would recommend taking one (or a few) of your PCR products and trying both ratios on them, running them out on a gel.

        So on the gel you would run:

        1) PCR Product w/o cleanup
        2) PCR Product w/ cleanup at 1.8x
        3) PCR Product w/ cleanup at 1.5x

        ...and see if there's a difference.

        It's a bit of extra work, but it's a small price to pay for peace of mind. This approach may also be better than testing on a ladder, since you'll be working with the PCR products directly (rather than with a ladder which may or may not have an inhibitory effect on the SPRI beads).
        Ok. I will do waht you suggested. Then I see
        I am thinking about PCR cycling for the first round is 18 cycle and in the second round is25cycle so is it ok to increase the cycle in the first round to 35 cycle what do you suggest?
        Many thanks

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by hssalgh2 View Post
          Ok. I will do waht you suggested. Then I see
          I am thinking about PCR cycling for the first round is 18 cycle and in the second round is25cycle so is it ok to increase the cycle in the first round to 35 cycle what do you suggest?
          Many thanks
          This is probably better left for someone else to answer. I don't have any real experience with this protocol. I've gone toe-to-toe with the beads more than a few times, but nested PCR is another story.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by hssalgh2 View Post
            Ok. I will do waht you suggested. Then I see
            I am thinking about PCR cycling for the first round is 18 cycle and in the second round is25cycle so is it ok to increase the cycle in the first round to 35 cycle what do you suggest?
            Many thanks
            It depends on your experiment and input. It is not clear if you are preparing 16S region specific library for sequencing on Illumina systems or whole 16S for long read sequencing.

            Comment

            Latest Articles

            Collapse

            • seqadmin
              Current Approaches to Protein Sequencing
              by seqadmin


              Proteins are often described as the workhorses of the cell, and identifying their sequences is key to understanding their role in biological processes and disease. Currently, the most common technique used to determine protein sequences is mass spectrometry. While still a valuable tool, mass spectrometry faces several limitations and requires a highly experienced scientist familiar with the equipment to operate it. Additionally, other proteomic methods, like affinity assays, are constrained...
              04-04-2024, 04:25 PM
            • seqadmin
              Strategies for Sequencing Challenging Samples
              by seqadmin


              Despite advancements in sequencing platforms and related sample preparation technologies, certain sample types continue to present significant challenges that can compromise sequencing results. Pedro Echave, Senior Manager of the Global Business Segment at Revvity, explained that the success of a sequencing experiment ultimately depends on the amount and integrity of the nucleic acid template (RNA or DNA) obtained from a sample. “The better the quality of the nucleic acid isolated...
              03-22-2024, 06:39 AM

            ad_right_rmr

            Collapse

            News

            Collapse

            Topics Statistics Last Post
            Started by seqadmin, 04-11-2024, 12:08 PM
            0 responses
            18 views
            0 likes
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Started by seqadmin, 04-10-2024, 10:19 PM
            0 responses
            22 views
            0 likes
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Started by seqadmin, 04-10-2024, 09:21 AM
            0 responses
            16 views
            0 likes
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Started by seqadmin, 04-04-2024, 09:00 AM
            0 responses
            47 views
            0 likes
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Working...
            X