SEQanswers

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



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RiboZero for non-human samples salkh Illumina/Solexa 4 11-04-2016 09:28 AM
mRNA on Bioanalyser dobbr493 Sample Prep / Library Generation 11 04-25-2012 07:09 AM
E20 disappearing beads.... RPiddock SOLiD 5 11-03-2011 04:47 AM
BWA parameters for mRNA-seq aligning against mRNA refseq kwicher SOLiD 1 09-19-2011 03:45 AM
mrna seq or directional mrna seq link1 Sample Prep / Library Generation 0 08-12-2010 05:58 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-01-2012, 05:42 PM   #1
rndouglas
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 23
Default RiboZero - Disappearing mRNA?

I'm having some trouble with Epicentre's RiboZero Plant Leaf Kit, and I'm hoping someone here might be able to point me in the right direction.

I have been isolating total RNA from maize leaves using a standard Trizol procedure. I DNase-treat that RNA, then use the RiboZero kit.

The starting RNA and the DNase-treated RNA look fine on the Bioanalyzer (see attached photo, the top two frames of the figure).

However, after I run the RiboZero kit and I send my sample to the Bioanalyzer there seems to be nothing but tRNAs left (bottom frame of the attached figure), and I'm really not looking to just sequence tRNA.

I've tried this on four separate samples, and I keep getting the same Bioanalyzer result. The first two times I followed the RiboZero protocol for using the Qiagen RNeasy MinElute Cleanup kit, and the last two times I tried Zymo's RNA Clean & Concentrator kit.

Our DNA Core facility hasn't had anyone else use an rRNA removal kit, so they haven't been much help.
Am I reading my Bioanalyzer results correctly? I believe our DNA core ran the RiboZero on a separate mRNA Bioanalyzer chip instead of a total RNA chip.

I know there's at least some mRNA present in my total RNA extractions (before using RiboZero, after DNase-treatment) because I'm able to make a pretty decent batch of cDNA from them.

Any suggestions? I'm at my wit's end!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Untitled-1.jpg (65.6 KB, 206 views)
rndouglas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2012, 10:10 AM   #2
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,315
Default

I don't see anything necessarily wrong here. Our experience with maize (and other plants for that matter) is that rRNA seems to be >99% of the total RNA. Either that, or we just suck at obtaining high yields of non-ribosomal RNA from plants.

So, lots of rRNA, low percentage of non rRNA, what would you expect from successfully removing all the rRNA? Basically the picture you show. If you are doing normal RNA seq, I would suggest using the Zymo protocol that washes away the small RNA, then ask your core to run a pico RNA chip on your RNA. That would give you a profile of the length distribution of your resulting RNA without a giant small RNA peak squishing your mRNA down to the base line.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2012, 06:05 PM   #3
MPPFig
Junior Member
 
Location: Oregon

Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 7
Default trouble with RiboZero

I am also having trouble with this RiboZero plant leaf kit, I am posting bioanalyzer traces of one sample after I depleted the rRNA (notice a peak at 1300 nt). I continued with the construction of the library (ScriptSeq™ mRNA-Seq Library Preparation Kit) and this is the profile I obtained (second figure) in the bioanalyzer (HS-DNA chip). My concern is that my library pretty much contains this abundant fragment that was not clean up by the RiboZero kit. Has anybody seen this before?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg postRZ plant leaf.jpg (75.4 KB, 101 views)
File Type: jpg library prep example copy.jpg (78.1 KB, 113 views)
MPPFig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2012, 06:21 AM   #4
rndouglas
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 23
Default

I'm in the process of trying Phillip's suggesting right now. And by that I mean I'm still waiting for our DNA core to run the Bioanalyzer now that I've tried to remove all the smaller RNAs with the Zymo kit.
rndouglas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2012, 12:01 PM   #5
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,315
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MPPFig View Post
I am also having trouble with this RiboZero plant leaf kit, I am posting bioanalyzer traces of one sample after I depleted the rRNA (notice a peak at 1300 nt). I continued with the construction of the library (ScriptSeq™ mRNA-Seq Library Preparation Kit) and this is the profile I obtained (second figure) in the bioanalyzer (HS-DNA chip). My concern is that my library pretty much contains this abundant fragment that was not clean up by the RiboZero kit. Has anybody seen this before?
What species of plant is this?
--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2012, 09:01 PM   #6
MPPFig
Junior Member
 
Location: Oregon

Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 7
Default

Phillip:
This is Brachypodium, what do you think? Epicentre took the rRNA seqs and blasted those to their probes, they said RZ should pick up my rRNAs...
MPPFig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2012, 04:08 AM   #7
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,315
Default

1.3 thousand nucleotides would make it a chloroplast "16S" (small subunit) rRNA, most likely. Possibly your sample had a very high amount of chloroplast in it and RiboZero could not deplete it completely. But it does suggest that your 16S rRNA may be divergent enough in sequence from the consensus sequence Epicentre likely used to produce their binding oligos. Either that or your 16S has temperature-stable secondary structure that is interfering with oligo binding.

You could ask Epicentre for help. They might be able to suggest a tweak to your conditions (like starting with half the amount of total RNA) that would result in a better depletion.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2012, 12:51 PM   #8
rndouglas
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 23
Default

Finally got my new Bioanalyzer results back, and I can't say I'm encouraged.

I used the Zymo kit to remove the big tRNA peak and wanted to see if I had any mRNA left.

Should I just trash these guys and start over?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg mRNA.jpg (60.3 KB, 127 views)
rndouglas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2012, 07:48 AM   #9
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,315
Default

How much did you get (total) and how much do you need?
Was this a nano RNA chip or a pico?
To me they look fine. Well, a little weird you have so much stuff at >4 kb, but maybe that is expected in your species.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2012, 08:20 AM   #10
rndouglas
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 23
Default

I only need 50 ng for my library prep, and I have about 300 ng, so that's not an issue.

This was done on a pico chip.

Shouldn't I see a little bump for mRNA on the X-axis somewhere?

This is maize...I have no clue if the bump at 4kb is expected or not.
rndouglas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2012, 10:40 AM   #11
NormSci
Member
 
Location: Canada

Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 11
Default

FYI, from the Epicentre website FAQ RE: Ribozero:

Quote:
After I used a Ribo-Zero Kit, I noticed a peak at 100-140 nt in my Bioanalyzer traces (but no 16S/23S rRNA). Why is that?

This is normal and expected. The peaks observed in the 100- to 140-nt region on a Bioanalyzer trace correspond to tRNA, small noncoding RNAs, and small amounts of 5S rRNA (in cases where 5S rRNA removal is less efficient). These small RNAs are available for inclusion in a sequencing library if desired, but can be readily removed by gel or other size-selection techniques that are designed to remove small RNAs, either before or after library synthesis.
NormSci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2012, 12:23 PM   #12
lindseykelly
Junior Member
 
Location: pittsburgh

Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 5
Default

I used the RiboZero Gold kit for Humans on human tissue RNA also extracted with Trizol. I don't have a picture right now, but our bioanalyzer looked the same as rndouglas' picture. We had a large peak at the beginning and then pretty much nothing. I talked to Epicentre and sent them my picture and they said it looked exactly like it was supposed to. We created the library with the Illumina TruSeq RNA sample prep kit and it looked great. We are still working on the data analysis, but so far they look as expected.

so basically, mine looked the same and my library passed all the QC before I ran it. I say, make your library and go from there.

lindsey
lindseykelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2012, 01:24 PM   #13
MPPFig
Junior Member
 
Location: Oregon

Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 7
Default

Thanks Phillip! I tested a sample using MicroPoly(A)Purist™ Kit, 50ug total RNA as the input, this is how it looks when ran in the Pico Chip, the bioanalyzer calls a 3.5% rRNA contamination. It does look better than the RiboZero output, doesn't it?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg BA profile Ambion copy.jpg (82.5 KB, 74 views)
MPPFig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2012, 03:44 AM   #14
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,315
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MPPFig View Post
Thanks Phillip! I tested a sample using MicroPoly(A)Purist™ Kit, 50ug total RNA as the input, this is how it looks when ran in the Pico Chip, the bioanalyzer calls a 3.5% rRNA contamination. It does look better than the RiboZero output, doesn't it?
Probably, but those are two different types of depletions. The RiboZero clearly did not remove the 18S. Your polyA results are consistent with either: (1) effective removal of rRNA or (2) degradation of rRNA into a trace no longer identifiable as such. You won't know which until you sequence it or test it with qPCR. That 3.5% figure is obviously completely meaningless. You could have zero % rRNA or 100% rRNA (but degraded) and Agilent would have no idea.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2012, 02:56 PM   #15
rndouglas
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 23
Default

Talked to Epicentre today and learned that my traces are exactly what I should expect to see. Wish I had just called them a couple months ago! Full speed ahead with library construction now...
rndouglas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 07:13 AM   #16
whw
Member
 
Location: Bethesda MD

Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 19
Default

I saw a similar loss of mRNA with the RiboZero Human/Mouse/Rat kit. I wasn't too concerned with the loss of Bioanalyzer peaks but when I looked for hGUS mRNA by qPCR I found a 10-13x fold reduction. Any thoughts on this?
whw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2012, 07:51 AM   #17
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,315
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whw View Post
I saw a similar loss of mRNA with the RiboZero Human/Mouse/Rat kit. I wasn't too concerned with the loss of Bioanalyzer peaks but when I looked for hGUS mRNA by qPCR I found a 10-13x fold reduction. Any thoughts on this?
This really isn't enough information about your experiment to comment intelligently on.

Do you want to tell us 10-13x fold reduction means? Taken on face value it would mean that the absolute concentration of hGUS in your post-ribozero sample is ~10x lower than in your pre-ribozero sample. That could mean anything, though. It could mean your pre-ribozero RNA is in 200 ul whereas your post-ribozero is in 20 ul. Or they are in the same volume and therefore 90% of your mRNA is lost during ribozero isolation.

Or you could mean something else entirely. Please, if you are going to post here, give enough information to make it useful to answer you.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2012, 09:03 AM   #18
whw
Member
 
Location: Bethesda MD

Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 19
Default

Yup, sorry about that was in a bit of a rush yesterday.

I started with about 800ng of total RNA in 28uL of water and performed RiboZero as written. My final volume after concentration was 40uL which accounts for a small dilution.

I used nanodrop, bioanalyzer, and qPCR for the housekeeping gene hGUS to assess the quality of my ribo-depleted RNA. Nanodrop was very low between (0.5ng/uL and 1ng/uL) which was fine, but my qPCR showed a 3+ cycle difference between pre- and post-depletion samples. That should correspond to about a 10-fold drop in the amount of hGUS mRNA present. It sounds like some people had a similar experience with the RiboZero plant kit. Bioanalyzer trace post-depletion was flat except for a very small tRNA peak.
whw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2012, 09:51 AM   #19
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,315
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whw View Post
I started with about 800ng of total RNA in 28uL of water and performed RiboZero as written. My final volume after concentration was 40uL which accounts for a small dilution.
What method did you use for concentration?

When we tried using ethanol precipitations it was hit or miss as to whether we recovered any RNA or not. (Which, by the way, is pretty typical for ethanol precipitations of RNA/DNA at low concentrations.)

When we switched to Zymo columns for RNA concentration, things were much more stable.

Also, did you do a dilution series on your qPCR? Could be you brought down something that inhibits qPCR, or the qPCR fluor.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2012, 09:56 AM   #20
whw
Member
 
Location: Bethesda MD

Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 19
Default

I've tried both Zymo columns and ethanol precipitation with similarly disappointing results.

I did run a dilution series on the qPCR but there was no sign of inhibition.

Thanks for your help, I just spoke with RiboZero and they sent me a replacement kit. I'll see if that fixes anything.
whw 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 12:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO