Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by madseq View Post
    I don´t know why Roche decided to leave the cDNA library peak at 900-1200 bp, but one of the reasons might be that higher than that we can start loosing the smallest cDNAs encoding for small proteins of 10 kDa and above...
    Guys, you are getting this backwards. The new FLX+ cDNA protocol uses 1400 bp+ templates. But since the read lengths are only 800 or so, maximum, there seems little point in making them so large. Especially since, as pointed out above, smaller messages will be lost entirely under such circumstances.


    --
    Phillip

    Comment


    • #17
      Phillip, the new XL+ cDNA protocol is exactly the same as the "old" cDNA library prep, they just added GS FLX+ Series — XL+ to the name and changed dates. The avg lenght size remais between 600-1200 bp and the majority of the fragments should be around 900-1200 bp. The new RL+ protocol calls for peaks around 1400-1800 bp whereas the standard RL was around 600-900 bp.

      Comment


      • #18
        MissDNA,
        Okay, I stand corrected. That makes the RL+ protocol even more mysterious.
        --
        Phillip

        Comment


        • #19
          Exactly! I have been asking this question to our Roche specialists and they were no able to tell me why yet. One limited to say it was because R&D has probably determined as the ideal condition.

          I asked Support about which emPCR conditions should be used for cDNA. Since cDNA protocol has not changed why not keep using the emPCR conditions for XLR70 and not XL+? I was told I should use XL+ emPCR when sequencing with XL+ kit. Do not understand why.

          We are doing bead recovery today from 2 RL+ libraries and we are going to do the procedure to evaluate for the presence of small fragments before proceed with sequencing. If there is no small fragments, we are going to sequence tomorrow and hope for long reads. We are no longer using those bad bead recovery lots nor expired emPCR reagents.

          Comment


          • #20
            I dream of 500bp

            Hi,
            we have had two sample runs since the FLX+ upgrade with the libraries shown below.

            Beads prepared once by us and then by Roche.

            The first run averaged 250bp length, this last one 350 bp length.

            Note all our FLXplus customers are sold sequence at above 500bp………so anything below that is non-delivery.

            Apart from length the run looks pretty good.

            Control run Type I control beads 713bp, our first run 300 bp, this run 428bp
            Control run Type II control beads 470bp, our first run 220 bp, this run 305bp

            Any ideas? Can we source a control library that will give 1-1.5 kb reads if machine is working well?

            FGP
            Attached Files

            Comment


            • #21
              Hi FGponce,

              what was the accuracy at 600 bp (98% match) of your first control test fragment run? The number of reads above 98% perfect match at 600 bp should be at least 56% for a control run (this can change when using libraries).

              Below that number you could have an instrument problem.

              You can ask Roche for a validated E coli XL+ library they prepared in Branford recently.

              Comment


              • #22
                Hi madseq,

                So the machine looked fine with avg 62% above 98% match for the control run.

                The data for the sample run attached above actually contains reads from 5 different biological samples/organisms. I may expect one or two to be recalcitrant due to long stretches of AAAs etc in the genome but not all five. Also, if the machine is working well why don't the control beads act as controls and produce long reads? Surely a control that doesn't act as a control during a run with bad libraries isn't actually a control?!

                I'll try and get a library that has run well on a FLX+ supplied by Roche.

                We havent done much FLX seq is it normal to see large sample dependent read length variation from libraries of similar fragment size?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by FGponce View Post
                  Hi madseq,

                  So the machine looked fine with avg 62% above 98% match for the control run.

                  The data for the sample run attached above actually contains reads from 5 different biological samples/organisms. I may expect one or two to be recalcitrant due to long stretches of AAAs etc in the genome but not all five. Also, if the machine is working well why don't the control beads act as controls and produce long reads? Surely a control that doesn't act as a control during a run with bad libraries isn't actually a control?!

                  I'll try and get a library that has run well on a FLX+ supplied by Roche.

                  We havent done much FLX seq is it normal to see large sample dependent read length variation from libraries of similar fragment size?
                  Did you separate the polyA containing libraries from the others, or did you sequence all of them together?? If you mixed them all, this could be the problem. And is it possible you have small fragments in the library on lane 1 of the bioanalizer?

                  Good runs in the FLX+ give readlength averages of 650-700. Don´t expect readlenths of 1000-1500.

                  And yes, the control beads perform differently depending on the sample you´re running, loading density, etc... They help to diagnose problems but they do not behave always exactly the same.

                  You should try to have your run analized by customer support, they have the tools to tell you if your failed run can be due to the samples used or if you are having issues with the instrument.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by RCJK View Post
                    MissDNA-I've only done 1 XL+ run with metagenomic samples (the 3rd image I posted) so maybe it was a fluke that it was shorter? I don't recall having any specifically bad XLR70 metagenomic runs in the past.
                    Hi RCJK, one question: do you follow exactly the XL+ Rapid Library protocol or you guys do any modification?

                    FAS has recommended us to change the nebulization conditions from 15 psi for 1 min to 20 psi for 1 min. This sort of recommendation made me think the real problem on our preps are the really long fragments rather possibity of having small ones. I repeated the libraries today and we got a larger % of fragments around 650-1200 bp than before. I sent the traces to Roche, and I am waiting on their ok to titrate and do the LV. We are perfoming the protocol for evaluation of fragments size after the first melt during enrichment. Only if we get fragments in the right range, we will sequence.

                    They did tell me that metagenomic samples can be harder to get to work on Plus.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by MissDNA View Post
                      Hi RCJK, one question: do you follow exactly the XL+ Rapid Library protocol or you guys do any modification?
                      Hi MissDNA, yes, for the XL+ RL preps I've done so far I've followed the protocol exactly. I haven't heard of any changes to the recommended nebulizing conditions, but if that's what they are recommending now maybe they have realized it results in better libraries.

                      Actually, I'd like to start using our Covaris to shear the DNA, but am not quite sure what size to go for or what settings to use. I'm sure they'll just say that it's not supported and not to do it. I've used it for XLR70 RL preps just fine, but am a bit hesitant to proceed with it for the XL+ RL preps.

                      On a side note, I did hear from Roche last week that they are recommending 6-8% enrichment recovery for best XL+ results. They said to still proceed with beads up to 20% enrichment, but that over ~8%, the signal intensities on the beads starts to get too high. I've asked that they put out some sort of bulletin or something with all their tips for a successful XL+ run since they seem to be highly variable.

                      Good luck and let us know how the run goes!

                      Jason

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Thanks, Jason. I will most definitely let you guys know.

                        I haven´t heard anything about enrichment rates. Our bad run it was with beads with very low enrichment. Problem is we used a box of emPCR reagent that expired on nov/11, this way we cannot get replacement for our run. I honestly don´t think that was the problem but I cannot argue with Roche on that, as using of expired reagents are not supposed to happen. Anyway, now we are doing all this tests under their supervision, with non expired reagents. We aslo got rid of the bead recovery reagents lots that have been showing problems.

                        I agrre theu should release a bulletin with tips, like they did for amplicon sequencing.

                        Could you do me a favor, and post the Agilent traces from your best and worse run, so I can see how they look like?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Hi Jason,

                          The recommended enrichment percentage for the GS FLX+, GS FLX and GS Junior platforms remains between 5% and 20%. Within this window, there is no correlation between increasing enrichment percentage and signal per base. A higher signal per base is typically indicative of other issues.

                          Please feel free to contact your local Roche representative with any issues or concerns and visit our website at www.my454.com/my454 for the most up to date guidelines.

                          Regards,

                          Nicole
                          Technical Support Scientist
                          454 Life Sciences, A Roche Company

                          Comment

                          Latest Articles

                          Collapse

                          • 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
                          • seqadmin
                            Techniques and Challenges in Conservation Genomics
                            by seqadmin



                            The field of conservation genomics centers on applying genomics technologies in support of conservation efforts and the preservation of biodiversity. This article features interviews with two researchers who showcase their innovative work and highlight the current state and future of conservation genomics.

                            Avian Conservation
                            Matthew DeSaix, a recent doctoral graduate from Kristen Ruegg’s lab at The University of Colorado, shared that most of his research...
                            03-08-2024, 10:41 AM

                          ad_right_rmr

                          Collapse

                          News

                          Collapse

                          Topics Statistics Last Post
                          Started by seqadmin, Yesterday, 06:37 PM
                          0 responses
                          11 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post seqadmin  
                          Started by seqadmin, Yesterday, 06:07 PM
                          0 responses
                          10 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post seqadmin  
                          Started by seqadmin, 03-22-2024, 10:03 AM
                          0 responses
                          51 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post seqadmin  
                          Started by seqadmin, 03-21-2024, 07:32 AM
                          0 responses
                          68 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post seqadmin  
                          Working...
                          X