SEQanswers

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



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Illumina MiSeq High cluster density, but low %PF problem setramis Illumina/Solexa 6 10-30-2017 03:31 PM
cluster density andersej Bioinformatics 1 12-12-2012 01:28 PM
optimum illumina flowcell cluster density calculation kmpphd Sample Prep / Library Generation 6 12-08-2012 06:15 AM
Are Illumina missing a trick over cluster density? henry.wood Illumina/Solexa 13 01-13-2011 12:18 PM
Cluster density Illumina CatVincent Introductions 2 11-23-2010 09:50 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-18-2018, 07:12 AM   #1
thiNGS
Member
 
Location: Netherlands

Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 21
Default Illumina NextSeq non homogenous cluster density

Hello. I am performing whole genome sequencing of bacterial strains and I got very variable cluster density (and hence signal intensity) over the four lanes of the flow cell. Has anyone ever seen this and can help me troubleshooting? Thanks for any suggestions you might want to give me.
Attached Images
File Type: png Capture.PNG (23.3 KB, 15 views)
thiNGS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2018, 09:29 AM   #2
JoeKutch
Member
 
Location: Philadelphia

Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 13
Default

Intensity =/= cluster density, though they are related. There can be variations in intensity from imperfections in the flow cell, smudges on the surface, and focusing. Even reagent age/batch.

The first image I've attached is from a low density (150K/mm^2) and the second is from a high density (280K/mm^2). Notice that the lower density run has a much higher intensity (see the scale on the right). Despite the variations in intensity, all four lanes from the first run were within 5% (<3million reads) of each other in terms of reads PF. A similar percentage variability was seen in the high density, lower intensity run.

As long as there are no dramatic quality drops associated with the areas of low intensity, I wouldn't be concerned.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Low density.JPG (67.0 KB, 6 views)
File Type: jpg High density.JPG (65.3 KB, 6 views)
JoeKutch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2018, 09:42 AM   #3
thiNGS
Member
 
Location: Netherlands

Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 21
Default

Many thanks for your reply. I see this pattern with all my runs despite reagents and flow cell batches though. I wonder if my library concentration might be too high and so if I am "overloading" the flow cell. The problem is in lanes like 3 and 4 I lose quite a lot of reads because at least 15% won't pass the filter. Do you think overloading the flow cell might be a possible reason?
thiNGS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2018, 09:55 AM   #4
JoeKutch
Member
 
Location: Philadelphia

Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 13
Default

Without knowing the cluster densities reported by your instrument, I couldn't say.

What are the average densities for each of the 4 lanes, and the number of raw and PF reads for each lane?

Our NextSeq generally maintains >90% PF with cluster densities up to 240K/mm^2, but the recommended spec by Illumina is 180-220K/mm^2. If you're outside of that range, I would recommend reducing your loading concentration proportionally based on how far over you are loading (i.e. if you're loading at what you believe to be 1.8pM, and getting densities of 270K/mm^2, try loading instead at 1.8 * (200/270) = 1.3 pM to target that 200K/mm^2 density.


One other possibility - Is your phasing/prephasing higher in lanes 3 and 4? The fact that both lanes seem to trail off in intensity (and presumably density) indicates a possible delivery issue. If the phasing and prephasing for those two lanes is higher than L1, that would support the idea of a reagent delivery/fluidics problem. If this is the case, only a service engineer call can guarantee restored functionality, but you could try doing a few full washes with warm MilliQ water to flush any residue/clogs from the lines.
JoeKutch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2018, 01:31 PM   #5
misterc
Member
 
Location: Livermore, CA

Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 32
Default

NextSeq fluidics lane pairs are odd vs. even (i.e. lanes 1 & 3 get SBS pumping while lanes 2 & 4 are imaged).
misterc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2018, 01:41 PM   #6
JoeKutch
Member
 
Location: Philadelphia

Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by misterc View Post
NextSeq fluidics lane pairs are odd vs. even (i.e. lanes 1 & 3 get SBS pumping while lanes 2 & 4 are imaged).
That's true, yes. But are lanes 1/3 and 2/4 treated as a single continuous lane with SBS flowing through 1 and then into 3, or does the line split and feed both of them? I always thought it was the latter, which doesn't preclude the individual lanes clogging. I could definitely be wrong about that though, I've only peeked inside our NextSeq during service calls, I haven't dug in it myself.
JoeKutch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2018, 02:29 PM   #7
misterc
Member
 
Location: Livermore, CA

Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 32
Default

Good point. Yes, it's the latter (separate syringes pull the fluid through each of the two lanes simultaneously). It's entirely possible thiNGS has a fluidics issue on lane 1 there, but it seems like the fluidics on NextSeq are much more robust against clogs than it's HiSeq predecessor.
misterc 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 11:18 PM.


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