SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Applications Forums > Sample Prep / Library Generation



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
qubit/picogreen seqgirl123 Sample Prep / Library Generation 4 11-02-2013 08:06 AM
Qubit vs Nanodrop discrepancies?? amylee86 General 1 07-10-2013 08:50 AM
Qubit versus qPCR cmuletz Sample Prep / Library Generation 3 06-20-2013 08:43 AM
eGel, Qubit, Bioanalyzer: when and why? Nu2NGS Sample Prep / Library Generation 6 06-22-2012 02:54 AM
Qubit data? jminich444 Sample Prep / Library Generation 1 04-25-2012 04:43 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-02-2013, 01:23 AM   #1
addyblanch
Member
 
Location: Nottingham

Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 29
Default Qubit Quantification

Hi All,

I've been using Qubit dsDNA kits to quantify my DNA preps for about 12 months.

Recently we've had issues with low yields from our preps so to save Qubit reagents while troubleshooting we ran the samples on a Nanodrop. We do a phenol:chloroform:isoamyl alcohol extraction followed by ethanol precipitation and RNAse A step from bacterial culture.

With the Qubit quantification I was used to getting ~200ng/ul when we ran these on the Nanodrop the yields were coming back as 1ug/ul average! I know the nanodrop overestimates and contaminates fluoresce giving false readings but would this account for that greater difference?

I've checked the samples with a ssDNA kit also and that came back at around 40ng/ul and also ran the samples on 2 different Qubits to ensure it wasn't a fault with ours and they both read the same.

Some have mentioned the DNA might be supercoiled giving low Qubit readings but I have similar readings with fragmented DNA too.


Any ideas or thoughts much appreciated.

Adam
addyblanch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 08:25 AM   #2
SNPsaurus
Registered Vendor
 
Location: Eugene, OR

Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 451
Default

From my experience, the nanodrop usually gives a number that is 5X-10X higher than the Qubit reading. This has been consistent even when getting samples from others. The Qubit reading, in our hands, has been more useful for loading sequencers and other activities.
__________________
Providing nextRAD genotyping and PacBio sequencing services. http://snpsaurus.com
SNPsaurus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 08:29 AM   #3
TonyBrooks
Senior Member
 
Location: London

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 298
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SNPsaurus View Post
From my experience, the nanodrop usually gives a number that is 5X-10X higher than the Qubit reading. This has been consistent even when getting samples from others. The Qubit reading, in our hands, has been more useful for loading sequencers and other activities.
We see the same thing.
The Nanodrop measures everything that absorbs 260nm light and assumes it's all DNA. It's a poor assumption to make as lots of things also absorb light around the 260nm wavelength (phenol, RNA, ssDNA) etc.
TonyBrooks is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
fluorescence, qubit

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 03:33 AM.


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