SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Bioinformatics > Bioinformatics



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Say Hi to everybody! albraylee Introductions 0 11-01-2011 05:49 PM
hello, i am a novice but interested in NGS! Lyn Hsiong Introductions 0 09-26-2011 12:42 AM
Hello everyone! Lasia Introductions 0 08-23-2011 02:22 AM
Questions about solexa quality score! baohua100 Bioinformatics 23 05-20-2009 11:36 PM
Does SOLiD cost > 1 million USD !? salturki SOLiD 7 06-26-2008 01:16 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-15-2011, 07:40 PM   #21
Godevil
Member
 
Location: Japan

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 22
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbarker06 View Post
Why not just arrange the 1680 plates into a 40X42 array. Then make pools of all the samples in each row of 40 and each column of 42. PCR these 82 pools. The results give you the row and column position of each positive 96 well plate in your 40x42 array. Then test each clone in the positive plates. You won't miss any positives--if there happen to be two positives in the same plate you will find that. Assuming that there are three positives,you will do less than 400 PCR reactions to find the individual positive clones.

What you said is the 2 dimension-based design. But I prefer to use 3 or higher dimension, which can save me much more time and money for PCR. I've already considered lots of screening design. Higher dimention means more false possitive.

As in the 2-dimension method, the most false positive results is 3^2-3; in 3D is 3^3-3. The only way to reduce the false positive is to make sure only one positive clone locates in one superpool.

So, please help me on my probability question.

Last edited by Godevil; 12-15-2011 at 09:26 PM.
Godevil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 07:43 PM   #22
Godevil
Member
 
Location: Japan

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 22
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ECO View Post
For what it's worth, I'm really glad this wasn't homework and actual experimental biology.

In the future (and anyone reading this contemplating doing the same bounty for help...)...please be honest. As Simon said, the fun is in the biology...you're much more likely to get help being honest (with or without a bounty).
Hey, I just want to make my question simple to be understand for everyone. It has nothing to do with honest or not.

Whatever, if you are good at probability, please help me.

Last edited by Godevil; 12-15-2011 at 07:46 PM.
Godevil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2011, 06:01 AM   #23
HESmith
Senior Member
 
Location: Bethesda MD

Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 503
Default

The recommended two-dimension design, followed by screening individual candidate plates (using 8x12 matrix, if you want to minimize the number of PCRs) is the most efficient method. If you're committed to higher order screening with fewer false positives, you may be able to incorporate a Steiner triple system (see http://www.nature.com/nmeth/journal/...nmeth1063.html for a similar application).
HESmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
experimental design, probability

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 04:53 AM.


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