SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > General



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Multiplexing attila.szanto RNA Sequencing 2 12-02-2011 07:32 AM
Illumina Human Exome vs Agilent Human Exome GW_OK Sample Prep / Library Generation 23 06-28-2011 12:06 PM
Multiplexing prep. James Sample Prep / Library Generation 0 09-27-2010 03:15 AM
multiplexing smallRNA moguin Illumina/Solexa 7 09-16-2010 02:06 PM
Multiplexing bioinfosm Illumina/Solexa 0 09-24-2008 09:05 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-12-2013, 01:27 AM   #1
erlandsen
Junior Member
 
Location: Trondheim

Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 6
Default Exome multiplexing

Hi,

have anyone tried to multiplex samples and targeted for higher coverage in samples vs. controls. Eg. as in the truseq exome enrichment one is expected to pool 500 ng of each library, but instead use 25 % control and 75% sample?

Another question: is it possible to go down in concentration say to 250 ng into the exome enrichment protocol, or is 500 ng an absolute lower limit?

Regards,

see
erlandsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2013, 07:02 AM   #2
kwaraska
Senior Member
 
Location: Boston,MA

Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 122
Default

I know with Sure Select you can pool in any proportion you want, but the lower limit really is the least you shoudl work with. Keep in mind that they obtain their values from nanodrop which is roughly twice what you will see on a bioanlyzer. So you can use 250ng from a bioanlyzer concentration but 500ng from a nanodrop.

At least, that has been my experience.
kwaraska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2013, 09:59 AM   #3
erlandsen
Junior Member
 
Location: Trondheim

Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 6
Default

Hi kwaraska, and thanks for comment.

I only use Qbit for cuantifying the libraries on this step. But I have checked NanoDrop, Qbit and qRT-PCR quantification on the Truseq protocol, and my experience is that NanoDrop "overestimate" ca 20 % compared to Qbit and Qbit again "overestimate" ca 10-15% compared to qRT-PCR. I trust qRT-PCR to be most reliable. I never use Bioanalyzer for quantification.
erlandsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2013, 12:11 PM   #4
kwaraska
Senior Member
 
Location: Boston,MA

Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 122
Default

Agreed that is the most reliable.

But when they tell you that you need 500ng, they are assuming data from a nondrop. I have used 250ng from a bioanlyzer and done well.

If you feel the difference is 20% then you can use 400ng instead of 500ng.

It is assumed that you will not use qPCR at this step because it will not be reliable for what you are trying to generate. You simply need sufficient DNA library to capture.
kwaraska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 01:52 PM   #5
mveerapen
Junior Member
 
Location: Miami, FL

Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1
Default

I am using the SureSelect 50 Mb capture - would I be able to multiplex my samples. I was thinking of including a 1:1 (in terms of QuBit concentration) in the capture. Would I be able to computationally tease out which variants belong to which sample?

On another note, if I have a mixed sample, where the DNA was extracted from a fixed tissue that has a heterogenous tissue (where I assume 0.25:0.75 ratio of tissue 1:tissue 2), would I be able to tease out variants belonging to tissue 1 and 2 separately?

If I had posted this question in a wrong thread, please correct me? I am new in SEQanswers.
mveerapen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
coverage, exome enrichment, multiplexing

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 01:32 AM.


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