SEQanswers

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



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
16s MiSeq Illumina library concentration and PhiX BioGenomics Sample Prep / Library Generation 19 10-11-2017 11:10 AM
PhiX removal jamimo Illumina/Solexa 5 04-06-2015 05:50 AM
Calculating concentration of whole sample based on concentration of dilution leftisthominid General 0 03-30-2015 12:54 PM
less PhiX than you think? beardy_man Illumina/Solexa 1 11-08-2013 12:50 PM
V3 PhiX kthai Illumina/Solexa 0 04-01-2011 12:21 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-08-2015, 07:51 AM   #21
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,300
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dfhdfh View Post
That's a really good point. However, the libraries were all quantified in the same way and I can predict pretty well what cluster densities I'll get. So I'm actually quite confident with my measurements.
Yeah, this is what we were seeing. Crazy variation in the number of phiX clusters.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2015, 08:45 AM   #22
Jessica_L
Senior Member
 
Location: Washington, D.C. metro area

Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 116
Default

Might it be an issue with either the NaOH or the PhiX library's buffer? Maybe the concentration of the buffer (or one of the components) is off even if the amount of PhiX DNA in the tube is correct? That sort of makes sense in my mind since mixing the PhiX and main library (the Purdue way) might dilute whatever inhibitors are present down to insignificant levels.

When I've seen cluster numbers deviate from expectation, they were usually related to the pH of the sodium hydroxide. I've taken to checking with pH strips before starting my denaturation step. I've had to toss more than one tube of NaOH on more than one occasion.

I'm not sure that either of these explanations adequately explain why you're seeing differences at high percentage vs low percentage spike-ins, though. Denatured PhiX should be denatured PhiX and it would either work or it wouldn't.

Might there be some sequence in your bacterial libraries that could be interacting with the PhiX sequence at the flow cell hybridization step?
Jessica_L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2015, 09:03 AM   #23
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,300
Default

I like the idea of phiX library's buffer being the culprit ...
Seems like we never have trouble with the HiSeq in this regard, though.
Also doesn't explain dfhdfh's results.
--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2015, 10:29 AM   #24
Jessica_L
Senior Member
 
Location: Washington, D.C. metro area

Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 116
Default

That was exactly my thought-- it doesn't really explain the entire issue since a lot of the variability seems to be instrument dependent. Maybe it's somehow related to onboard clustering? In which case, a HiSeq in rapid mode should have the same issue?
Jessica_L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2015, 10:49 AM   #25
GenoMax
Senior Member
 
Location: East Coast USA

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,814
Default

Clearly people take phiX seriously

Does it matter if one recovers less (based on other posts), as long as it positively influences a run in reaching completion?
GenoMax is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2015, 01:10 AM   #26
dfhdfh
Member
 
Location: Germany

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 46
Default

In my mind it does, because, on the one hand, I want as little PhiX as possible in order to maximize my actual data output. On the other hand, I want a high enough percentage in order to enable sequencing of low diversity samples. In theory, this balance is simple, in practice it is a bit of a pain.
dfhdfh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2015, 11:37 AM   #27
sweetph3
Member
 
Location: New Jersey

Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 22
Default

What is the fragment size of the PhiX library? I haven't ever run it on a Bioanalyzer, so I don't know if it's relatively small or large. Since smaller fragments tend to cluster with better efficiency than larger fragments, could the variations seen here just be due to certain libraries clustering more (or less) efficiently than the PhiX controls because they are smaller (or larger) than the PhiX?
sweetph3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2015, 10:51 AM   #28
martagh1
Junior Member
 
Location: Michigan

Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1
Default

I have had these issues with PhiX not aligning as well as it should when I rum miRNA libraries in either MiSeq or NextSeq, and Illumina has told me that it is very dependent on the size of your fragments. Sweetph3 you are right, smaller fragments cluster better than larger ones, so if your library has an average size of 150nt (like the miRNA ones) they will cluster way better than PhiX which is larger (if I remember correctly Illumina told me it is around 465bp). So you have to make sure, in those cases, that you load more PhiX than normal to make sure it aligns closer to the expected spike-in, and as such you get good enough diversity.
martagh1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2015, 06:54 AM   #29
Jessica_L
Senior Member
 
Location: Washington, D.C. metro area

Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 116
Default

From Illumina's technote:

"The mean insert size of the PhiX v3 library is approximately 375 bp,
corresponding to approximately a 500 bp library size if visualized on a
Bioanalyzer."
Jessica_L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2015, 06:57 AM   #30
dfhdfh
Member
 
Location: Germany

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 46
Default

So, in my case, PhiX should cluster better than my library, whose size (~630 bp total) I exactly know because it's an amplicon library. However, that's not the case.
dfhdfh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2018, 02:02 PM   #31
captainentropy
Member
 
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 89
Default

Check the concentration of PhiX by qPCR (e.g. KAPA). I don't think I've yet seen a tube from Illumina come in at 10 nM. It's usually much higher, in my experience.

Also, I've noticed that if you make a 20 pM denatured PhiX stock ahead of time and use it over a period of time, the %aligned/%expected will drop with each run. Once I mistakenly used a tube of 20 pM that was left out overnight and the %aligned was massively off. I'm suspecting that much of it had renatured.

Also, I'm in the habit of aliquoting 0.2 N NaOH into 50 uL aliquots, freezing them, and only using them a couple of times. Same for the 20 pM PhiX. After the 5 min denaturing step I follow that with 1 min at 95 C. Illumina recommends an additional heating step for high GC samples, but IMO it's a good insurance policy against an aliquot of weak NaOH. Plus, it shouldn't hurt the samples/PhiX...
captainentropy 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 07:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO