![]() |
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Two cDNA Peaks on Bioanalyzer | patkrat | Sample Prep / Library Generation | 3 | 10-18-2017 07:15 AM |
Problematic ddRAD library post-size selection bioanalyzer trace | nextgenNOOB | Sample Prep / Library Generation | 3 | 09-07-2017 05:56 PM |
ddRAD: Performing PCR BEFORE Size-Selection? | Carcharodon | Sample Prep / Library Generation | 8 | 05-16-2017 12:48 AM |
Bioanalyzer: Multiple Peaks after library PCR | HarryHaller89 | Sample Prep / Library Generation | 10 | 06-21-2016 12:50 AM |
Bioanalyzer Peaks | Wilkes | Sample Prep / Library Generation | 1 | 09-06-2011 12:32 PM |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#1 |
Junior Member
Location: Arkansas Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 5
|
![]()
Hello,
I have a problem with a post-PCR ddRAD library that was prepared using Peterson (2012). It was prepared along with another index for sequencing on one Illumina lane, and the pre-PCR size selection for both indices was supposed to be 454-509 bp. However, the Bioanalyzer results show two smaller peaks for one of the indices that shouldn't be there (see attached images), and the smaller peaks should be outside the size-selection range. Thus, it must have post size selection. Does anyone know what might have caused the two smaller peaks to occur, and should I worry about it during sequencing? Thank you, -Bradley |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Location: KiwiTeritory Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 19
|
![]()
I wonder how many PCR cycles you have done and what was the total yield.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Junior Member
Location: Arkansas Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 5
|
![]()
Thank you for your prompt reply. I did 12 PCR cycles. The post-PCR yield was 45.6 ng/uL, which come to think of it does seem high. Pre-PCR DNA was ~1 ng/uL.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Jafar Jabbari
Location: Melbourne Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,238
|
![]()
If you have run size selected tags on BA or still have remaining to run you can check for the presence of those peaks. I think the size selection has been sub optimal.
Other weak possibility is over amplification. I wonder what was the PCR input and final library elution volumes. If it turns out to be over-amplification then a new library needs to be prepped. If it is result of size selection then you just will loose some reads and library can be sequenced. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Junior Member
Location: Arkansas Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 5
|
![]() Quote:
That's a good idea about running the size selected DNA on the BA. I will try that to see if the issue is pre or post PCR. I imagine that's about the only thing I can do at this point outside of re-doing library prep. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Jafar Jabbari
Location: Melbourne Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,238
|
![]()
So you have used in total 20 ng of size selected tags for PCRs and got 45.6 ng/ul after pooled PCR clean up. I am interested to know what was the elution volume from beads to look at possibility of over-amplification.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Junior Member
Location: Arkansas Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 5
|
![]() Quote:
I should note that when I did the PCR, both the index that worked well (first image) and the index that contained the multiple peaks were done at the same time. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Jafar Jabbari
Location: Melbourne Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,238
|
![]()
It does not seem to be result of over-amplification. Most likely cassette lane has been faulty or other weak cause could be amplicon contamination from the lab if you have recently processed amplicons in those sizes recently in the same location.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Junior Member
Location: Arkansas Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 5
|
![]()
That sounds reasonable to me. Thank you very much for your time and help. I greatly appreciate it.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
bioanalyzer, ddrad, peaks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|