SEQanswers

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



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TruSeq PCR Free LT Kit Issues addyblanch Illumina/Solexa 6 12-03-2018 02:49 AM
TruSeq DNA PCR-free Sample Preparation Kit (Part#15036187 Rev.A):extra peak, low qPCR snarapor Sample Prep / Library Generation 5 05-27-2014 05:03 AM
TruSeq DNA PCR-free vs NANO DNA kit mbk0asis Illumina/Solexa 8 05-17-2014 08:15 AM
TruSeq PCR-free transition avo Sample Prep / Library Generation 2 03-05-2014 02:45 AM
Truseq DNA PCR-free kit Laruo Sample Prep / Library Generation 1 03-05-2014 02:42 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-08-2014, 11:06 PM   #1
vl80
Member
 
Location: Asia

Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 34
Default Nextera XT vs TruSeq PCR free

I have previously used the TruSeq DNA kit (only once) and now need to move on to use either Nextera XT or TruSeq PCR free kits and perform the whole library prep alone for the first time.
I would greatly welcome opinions on which of the two kits have given better results for small genomes (bacterial)

2)
For Nextera XT, is it better not to use the bread normalization and do the traditional quantifications? There seem to be mixed experiences for using bead normalizations.

3) is there anyone using Qubit alone for library quantification? Or is it better to use KAPA qPCR instead or both?

4) This is probably a very naive question,
for Nextera XT with bacterial genomes, is it necessary to sonicate/ nebulize to get a larger size fragment and then use the kit based tagmentation than the kit alone.

Thanks a lot
vl80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2014, 01:13 AM   #2
nucacidhunter
Jafar Jabbari
 
Location: Melbourne

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,238
Default

1) For bacterial genome it would not make much difference in result. The consideration would be cost and availability of DNA input amount.

2) qPCR based quantification (not using normaliser beads) will increase chance of even number of read output for samples.

3) KAPA qPCR certainly is better than Qubit. Qubit only measures mass of DNA not cluster ready portion of library.

4) This question is a bit unclear to me. Using high molecular weight input DNA (without sonication) will give more consistent results. Sonication is not in the protocol and I do not see any reason for sonication.

Last edited by nucacidhunter; 06-09-2014 at 01:30 AM.
nucacidhunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
nextera xt, truseq pcr free

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 04:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO