SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Sequencing Technologies/Companies > Illumina/Solexa



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Library peak-let contamination at high end of TruSeq BioAnalyzer trace Acacianpunk Sample Prep / Library Generation 3 06-10-2014 07:13 PM
Primer dimer in ChIP-seq library lavagirl Sample Prep / Library Generation 7 06-07-2013 05:52 AM
Newbler Warning - Primer contamination loba17 Bioinformatics 6 06-19-2012 05:47 AM
454Jr run metrics - possible PCR primer contamination NGS4YetiB 454 Pyrosequencing 0 08-18-2011 02:54 PM
Plasmid contamination in Long Tag Paired End library kmcarr 454 Pyrosequencing 3 03-11-2009 05:29 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-16-2014, 02:44 AM   #1
Morten
Junior Member
 
Location: Denmark

Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9
Default Primer contamination in library

Hi all,

We have been preparing libraries for Illumina sequencing using the ScriptSeq v2 kit. This gave us a bit of trouble and the resulting library is not really perfect. There is a large peak at 69 bp.
Please see the bioanalyzer image.

The peak at 69 bp is about the size of a single primer. Not an adapter-dimer.
My question is would this be a problem for cluster generation and sequencing?

This type of contamination would not be amplified, so I guess it would not be a problem, but I might be missing something? Would you feel safe sequencing this library?

Thank you,
Morten.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg bioanalyzer.jpg (73.9 KB, 111 views)
Morten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2014, 03:05 AM   #2
tegudet
Junior Member
 
Location: Tübingen, Germany

Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1
Default

Hi Morten,
I think this product could be sequenced and contaminate your reads.
I suggest you to use BluePippin, where you select the size of the product you want (let say 90bp to 400bp), so that you exclude 69bp primer contamination.

Good luck,

tegudet
tegudet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2014, 04:22 AM   #3
Morten
Junior Member
 
Location: Denmark

Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9
Default

Thank you for your reply tegudet.
However, the yield of this library is not good at all. There is simply not enough material to attempt a size selection.
As I see it my options are either sequence as is or remake the library.
Morten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2014, 06:58 AM   #4
microgirl123
Senior Member
 
Location: New England

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 200
Default

We sequence libraries with excess adapter on the MiSeq all the time. It's the adapter dimers that cause the problem. Single adapters can bind to the flow cell, but cannot bridge amplify so are not sequenced. Adapter dimers both bind and bridge amplify so they cause significant problems.
microgirl123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 04:30 AM   #5
Morten
Junior Member
 
Location: Denmark

Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9
Default

Thanks a lot for the first hand info!
I will go ahead and have the library sequenced.
Morten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 03:44 PM   #6
Morgane_AUS
Member
 
Location: Australia

Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 25
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morten View Post
Thanks a lot for the first hand info!
I will go ahead and have the library sequenced.
How did it go ?
Morgane_AUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 03:53 PM   #7
Morgane_AUS
Member
 
Location: Australia

Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 25
Default Adapter dimer contamination

Quote:
Originally Posted by microgirl123 View Post
We sequence libraries with excess adapter on the MiSeq all the time. It's the adapter dimers that cause the problem. Single adapters can bind to the flow cell, but cannot bridge amplify so are not sequenced. Adapter dimers both bind and bridge amplify so they cause significant problems.
Hi,

Have you ever attempted to sequence a library with such a high proportion of adapter dimers ? Please see the gel here:
https://bioinfo4biologists.wordpress...on-of-the-day/

We planned to use a single end 50 bp read (MiSeq V2 - 15 M reads, 24 samples, genome size 4.41 Mbp). Basically the cell might be flogged with adapters. My reasoning is as follow

Cartridge: 15 Million reads
Targeted number of reads: 10 Million reads
25% is ChiPed DNA: 2.5 Million reads
24 Samples: 0.1 Million reads/sample
50 bp per read: 5.2 Million bp /sample ---> 1x genome coverage ->BAD

Any hint would be greatly appreciated.

Morgane

Last edited by Morgane_AUS; 12-02-2014 at 09:33 PM.
Morgane_AUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 05:10 PM   #8
cmbetts
Senior Member
 
Location: Bay Area

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 118
Default

Are you sure that's actually adapter dimer and not a primer-dimer o the library amplification primers? The full Illumina adapters are about twice the size of your peak (~120bp, assuming these are TruSeq compatible), and primer dimers essentially invisible to the sequencer since they don't have all of the necessary flowcell and priming sequences. I do see a little of the 120bp peak, but I'd expect it to be <5% of reads...
cmbetts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 05:56 PM   #9
Morgane_AUS
Member
 
Location: Australia

Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 25
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmbetts View Post
Are you sure that's actually adapter dimer and not a primer-dimer o the library amplification primers? The full Illumina adapters are about twice the size of your peak (~120bp, assuming these are TruSeq compatible), and primer dimers essentially invisible to the sequencer since they don't have all of the necessary flowcell and priming sequences. I do see a little of the 120bp peak, but I'd expect it to be <5% of reads...
Mmm.. maybe you're right.. NEBNext ultra DNA adaptor are about 70 bp long and form a hairpin that would produce a ~35 bp double stranded fragment.

The primers though are 60 bp and could be responsible of the 120 bp peak.

Now what I'm wondering is whether the adaptors can make concatemers ?

Are you saying that you would sequence a library looking like this ?

Thanks !

Last edited by Morgane_AUS; 12-02-2014 at 05:58 PM.
Morgane_AUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 06:22 PM   #10
cmbetts
Senior Member
 
Location: Bay Area

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 118
Default

I guess it depends on how precious your sample is. That's a slightly higher MW peak than I'm used to seeing for library amplification primers (but I've also nevr used this particular kit), and while I wouldn't expect them to sequence, if they are true primer-dimers and not excess primers, they might still have some of the necessary sequences to interfere with proper sequencing of the library. I'd also be concerned about that super-wide library size distribution as well. It would be difficult to know just how much to load on the sequencer since I'd expect that a sizable amount of it is too large to successfully cluster. I'd still be tempted to try a two-sided Ampure size selection and elute in a small volume to concentrate.
cmbetts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 06:36 PM   #11
Morgane_AUS
Member
 
Location: Australia

Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 25
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmbetts View Post
I guess it depends on how precious your sample is. That's a slightly higher MW peak than I'm used to seeing for library amplification primers (but I've also nevr used this particular kit), and while I wouldn't expect them to sequence, if they are true primer-dimers and not excess primers, they might still have some of the necessary sequences to interfere with proper sequencing of the library. I'd also be concerned about that super-wide library size distribution as well. It would be difficult to know just how much to load on the sequencer since I'd expect that a sizable amount of it is too large to successfully cluster. I'd still be tempted to try a two-sided Ampure size selection and elute in a small volume to concentrate.

I didn't do the two sided size selection because the protocol didn't recommend to do it when starting the lib prep with less than 100 ng (and I started with 0.25 ng !). I'm worried I will loose the DNA if I do it now. These samples are quite precious (results of working the last 5 week-ends - it is a side project) and I won't be able to repeat the whole experiment due to other time constraints.

I was thinking about doing one bead purification step to remove the 120 bp fragment. Do you think large fragments can affect the whole sequencing run?

Thanks for you advice !
Morgane_AUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 09:00 PM   #12
nucacidhunter
Jafar Jabbari
 
Location: Melbourne

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,238
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgane_AUS View Post
Hi,

Have you ever attempted to sequence a library with such a high proportion of adapter dimers ? Please see the gel there: https://bioinfo4biologists.wordpress...dapter-dimers/
Could you attach your figure. I cannot open this link.
nucacidhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 09:29 PM   #13
Morgane_AUS
Member
 
Location: Australia

Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 25
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nucacidhunter View Post
Could you attach your figure. I cannot open this link.
sorry I don't know what's wrong with the link.

Here it is. Normal means that ChIPed DNA was used directly as input of the lib prep. WGA means ChIPed DNA was amplified using a whole genome amplification kit before lib prep. I started the lib prep with 0.25 ng of ChIPed DNA and 2.5 ng of amplified ChIPed DNA.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Chip-seq size distribution.pdf (37.1 KB, 36 views)
Morgane_AUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 09:39 PM   #14
Morgane_AUS
Member
 
Location: Australia

Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 25
Default

updated link
https://bioinfo4biologists.wordpress...on-of-the-day/
Morgane_AUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 09:50 PM   #15
nucacidhunter
Jafar Jabbari
 
Location: Melbourne

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,238
Default

It is difficult to figure out the nature of band in 100-200 bp mostly because of overloaded ladder. A TapeStation or Bioanalyser would have been better for diagnosis. If you had a no-template library prep that also would have helped with working out the possible source of that band. In any case, you can clean it with 0.9x bead twice. Larger fragments won’t an issue as cluster generation favours smaller fragments.
nucacidhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 09:56 PM   #16
Morgane_AUS
Member
 
Location: Australia

Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 25
Default

We have the Qsep (similar to bioanalyser) but something went wrong with the cartridge so I had to use a gel. I had to overexpose it in order to see the smear (there is only 1 uL of ladder..).

I will include a no template library prep next time, I couldn't here because of the number of samples I have and kit size.

may I ask why you would do the 0.9x bead twice ?

Thanks for your insights !
Morgane_AUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 10:02 PM   #17
nucacidhunter
Jafar Jabbari
 
Location: Melbourne

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,238
Default

One time wash less likely will get rid of that band. If a small residue of that band (prsumably primer- or adapter-dimer) is left in youer sample, they will form clusters more efficiently and you may get very small portion of reads from your target fragments.
nucacidhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 10:04 PM   #18
Morgane_AUS
Member
 
Location: Australia

Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 25
Default

I don't have much DNA in there so I'm worried I will loose so much by doing it twice... I guess there is no win win situation here ! Finger crossed !
Morgane_AUS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 10:08 PM   #19
nucacidhunter
Jafar Jabbari
 
Location: Melbourne

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,238
Default

I do not know how many PCR cycles you have done. But you can do 2-3 cycles after 1st clean up.
nucacidhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2014, 09:29 AM   #20
cmbetts
Senior Member
 
Location: Bay Area

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 118
Default

I was about to suggest the same thing. Post-PCR, you always have the option of hitting it with a few more cycles if you end up with low yield. At this point, all of the fragments have been amplified enough that you don't really need to worry about drop-out anymore, you just run the risk of further distorting their relative abundance.
cmbetts 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 01:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO