Adaptor technologies comparison

casual_seqs · 06-17-2009, 03:21 AM

Hello,

I am interested in the comparison/respective advantages and weak points of the various adapters technologies, from the point of view of in-vitro genomic libraries construction and amplification, the avoidance of artifacts, and ease of preparation.

1°) Comments of users with a global view on this (including the adapter technologies of Solexa, Illumina, Solid, etc...) ?
I am interested in the details also (eventual exo protection, eventual 3'-end and/or 5'-end modification, etc...)

2°) Alternatly, I would welcome comments of users with hands-on experience with their particular library preps, regarding the avoidance of artifacts, and ease of preparation, and structures of the oligos.

3°) about the Solid adaptors: (see also http://seqanswers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=588)

I have read in the forum (http://seqanswers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=198, sci_guy), that the solid adaptors are non-phosphorylated, so that P1-P1, P2-P2, or P1-P2 dimers are not formed at the ligation step; (by the way, are the 3'TT-overhangs efficient at avoiding ligation to genomic DNA ?)
Also, for the amplification steps, the targets of the primers are generated by nick translation.
Those features appears clever; Does this technique readily outperforms the competitor's adapters technologies ?

note: I transferred the initial post http://seqanswers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1944, to this forum.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PubMed: Performance comparison of exome DNA sequencing technologies.	Newsbot!	Literature Watch	0	02-03-2012 12:20 AM
HELP,why consider reads with 5' adaptor as contaminants?	Euler	Bioinformatics	0	01-14-2010 11:50 PM
PubMed: Comparison of next generation sequencing technologies for transcriptome chara	Newsbot!	Literature Watch	0	08-04-2009 06:00 AM
Adaptor technologies comparison	casual_seqs	SOLiD	1	06-17-2009 03:44 AM
PubMed: A Comparison of Global Gene Expression Measurement Technologies in Arabidopsi	Newsbot!	Literature Watch	0	07-17-2008 06:02 AM

06-17-2009, 03:21 AM	#1
casual_seqs Junior Member Location: paris Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 5	Adaptor technologies comparison Hello, I am interested in the comparison/respective advantages and weak points of the various adapters technologies, from the point of view of in-vitro genomic libraries construction and amplification, the avoidance of artifacts, and ease of preparation. 1°) Comments of users with a global view on this (including the adapter technologies of Solexa, Illumina, Solid, etc...) ? I am interested in the details also (eventual exo protection, eventual 3'-end and/or 5'-end modification, etc...) 2°) Alternatly, I would welcome comments of users with hands-on experience with their particular library preps, regarding the avoidance of artifacts, and ease of preparation, and structures of the oligos. 3°) about the Solid adaptors: (see also http://seqanswers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=588) I have read in the forum (http://seqanswers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=198, sci_guy), that the solid adaptors are non-phosphorylated, so that P1-P1, P2-P2, or P1-P2 dimers are not formed at the ligation step; (by the way, are the 3'TT-overhangs efficient at avoiding ligation to genomic DNA ?) Also, for the amplification steps, the targets of the primers are generated by nick translation. Those features appears clever; Does this technique readily outperforms the competitor's adapters technologies ? note: I transferred the initial post http://seqanswers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1944, to this forum.