Go Back   SEQanswers > Sequencing Technologies/Companies > Ion Torrent

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bioruptor vs Hydroshear EMONGS General 14 12-08-2011 01:57 AM

Thread Tools
Old 08-03-2011, 03:14 AM   #1
Junior Member
Location: London

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2
Default Do we need the bioruptor?

Weve recently bought an Ion Torrent and have just received our training.

Whilst setting up the lab we purchased a Bioruptor as we thought it was an essential piece of kit but it seems that the new enzymatic fragmentations may mean that we dont need the Bioruptor. As its still sat in its box, unpackaged, were considering whether we should return it or sell it on, unopened.

Does anyone have any experience comparing results of enzymatic and mechanical fragmentation?
SeqGeorge's is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2011, 05:04 PM   #2
Location: USA

Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 23

I guess it really depends on your application. Enzymatic method will always has more or less bias comparing to sonication one. If the little bias doesn't bother you, sell or return the bioruptor.
bioits is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2011, 09:26 AM   #3
Senior Member
Location: Dronning Maud Land

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 129

Enzymatic: works well for non-degraded, clean, high molecular weight DNA. If DNA is degraded or dirty, the fragmentation time is less consistent. It is harder to go back and shear just a bit longer if the fragments are not in the range you need.

Bioruptor: More consistent, can alter the shearing protocol easily depending on DNA quality. Easy to take an aliquot of the sheared material, QC, and run the sample longer if needed.

I like enzymatic shearing in theory, but in practice find it more problematic when I get a lot of DNA samples with varying degrees of concentration and quality.
epistatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2011, 03:09 AM   #4
Junior Member
Location: London

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2

Can I ask how much you paid for the Bioruptor?
T199Y is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2011, 03:41 AM   #5
Senior Member
Location: Western Australia

Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 308

Agree with epistatic enzymatic shearing in theory works great. If you are processing the same type of sample then you can easily standardize. But if there is variation between your samples that will be magnified with enzymatic shearing. Of course with acoustic shearing you will see differences between samples but the variation is not as great.

I wouldn't send it back. It's a small price compared to what you will spend on everything and it is a nice tool to have in your toolbox. But it really depends on what you are going to be doing.

ETHANol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2011, 01:11 AM   #6
Junior Member
Location: London

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2

Thanks for all your replies.

The consensus seems to be to hang on to the Bioruptor. Although the PGM is intended for small labs, we anticipate working with a range of people from across the university (and hopefully beyond). This means the samples we'll work with (and their quality) will change between projects. Given this, your comments seem to suggest that the Bioruptor will more easily allow us to generate optimally fragmented DNA than the enzymatic protocol.

T199Y: I don't have the info to hand about how much we paid for it. Were you hoping to make us an offer on it?

SeqGeorge's is offline   Reply With Quote

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 07:02 AM.

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