SEQanswers

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



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
p-value for peak-calling using MACS ywlim Bioinformatics 8 08-08-2013 02:27 AM
low 260/230 ratio for RNA-seq sample yuzhang Sample Prep / Library Generation 3 09-27-2012 12:20 PM
Peak finding tools vaibhav_jain Bioinformatics 3 07-28-2011 02:15 AM
Ampure versus Qiaquick for small amounts of DNA Scotch Sample Prep / Library Generation 10 06-16-2011 07:50 AM
Consolidate peak lists? asiangg Bioinformatics 1 11-16-2009 07:34 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-31-2011, 07:00 AM   #1
skblazer
Member
 
Location: Massachusetts

Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 49
Default QIAquick Absorption Peak at 230nm rather than 260

Hello,

Each time, I used QIAquick gel extraction kit to extract the size selection product, the OD 260/230 is extremely weird (very low, close to 0), and 260/280 is a little bit higher (2.0-2.1). I found the absorption peak was moved from 260nm to 230nm, but the DNA should be extracted. I guess the remaining salt (such as EDTA) causes this, but I've tried to optimize the gel extraction step for several times (such as adding 6X volumes of QG, extending incubating time for QG, standing 5min after adding PE, ...), but they didn't work.

The colleagues at lab also have this problem, but it didn't affect their TOPO cloning or Sanger sequencing.

I have no idea if such weird ratio will affect some steps in the Illumina paired-end library preparation, such as Phusion PCR reaction or Cluster generation?

Anyone has such experience?

Many thanks,
SK
skblazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2011, 08:04 AM   #2
ECO
--Site Admin--
 
Location: SF Bay Area, CA, USA

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,287
Default

It's the guanidium-SCN in the QG. An extra (or even a third) PE wash can help. In my experience it can affect efficiencies of sensitive enzymatic reactions, but is not a huge problem for amplification based preps.
ECO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2011, 08:35 AM   #3
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,832
Default

If it is a peak at 230 nm, that probably is a guanidium salt. But if it is somewhat shorter it may be acetate (eg, sodium acetate). At high concentrations absorbs there. (I can dig up the reference and post it here, if anyone want me to...)

The difference is probably crucial. Sodium acetate is just a salt, but guanidium salts are powerful denaturants.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2011, 08:57 AM   #4
skblazer
Member
 
Location: Massachusetts

Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 49
Default

I' sorry, it's the peak shorter, it's just significantly higher at 230 than 260. (please see attached)

So the sodium acetate should not be a problem, am I right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmiguel View Post
If it is a peak at 230 nm, that probably is a guanidium salt. But if it is somewhat shorter it may be acetate (eg, sodium acetate). At high concentrations absorbs there. (I can dig up the reference and post it here, if anyone want me to...)

The difference is probably crucial. Sodium acetate is just a salt, but guanidium salts are powerful denaturants.

--
Phillip
Attached Images
File Type: jpg test2.JPG (29.4 KB, 108 views)
skblazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2011, 08:58 AM   #5
skblazer
Member
 
Location: Massachusetts

Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 49
Default

I'm sorry I described inappropriately, it's not a peak at 230, it's just 260/230 is very low.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ECO View Post
It's the guanidium-SCN in the QG. An extra (or even a third) PE wash can help. In my experience it can affect efficiencies of sensitive enzymatic reactions, but is not a huge problem for amplification based preps.
skblazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 07:12 AM   #6
Cofactor Genomics
Registered Vendor
 
Location: St. Louis

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 52
Default

In my experience, this type of curve is not unusual to see with the gel extraction kit. The moderator is correct, you should introduce more washes with PE than the manual states. This will help mitigate this peak, however it probably will not get rid of it completely. Normally, I would usually follow-up with some kind of buffer exchange (Ampure beads, Microcon, or drop dialysis), but I was always concerned about losing more sample and potentially introducing more bias. Thus, I would usually go with drop dialysis. Not sure many people do that anymore or are comfortable floating their sample on a dialysis disk in a bin of water.
Cofactor Genomics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2011, 04:44 AM   #7
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,832
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skblazer View Post
I' sorry, it's the peak shorter, it's just significantly higher at 230 than 260. (please see attached)

So the sodium acetate should not be a problem, am I right?
That looks like sodium acetate to me. A good paper on the UV spectrum of aqueous acetate is this one:

Reference Type: Journal Article
Author: Ruderman, Graciela
Author: Caffarena, Ernesto R.
Author: Mogilner, Inés G.
Author: Tolosa, Eduardo J.
Primary Title: Hydrogen Bonding of Carboxylic Acids in Aqueous Solutions—UV Spectroscopy, Viscosity, and Molecular Simulation of Acetic Acid
Journal Name: Journal of Solution Chemistry
Cover Date: 1998-10-21
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Issn: 0095-9782
Subject: Chemistry and Materials Science
Start Page: 935
End Page: 948
Volume: 27
Issue: 10
Url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022615329598
Doi: 10.1023/A:1022615329598

Is it a problem? Well to be able to see acetate on a nanodrop you probably need to be at 100 mM or more. It is not as bad as having guanidium salts in your sample for most downstream applications. But it can definitely cause problems to have 100 mM salt in your sample.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2011, 07:20 AM   #8
skblazer
Member
 
Location: Massachusetts

Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 49
Default

Thanks for the advice. I'll try washing twice by PE.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cofactor Genomics View Post
In my experience, this type of curve is not unusual to see with the gel extraction kit. The moderator is correct, you should introduce more washes with PE than the manual states. This will help mitigate this peak, however it probably will not get rid of it completely. Normally, I would usually follow-up with some kind of buffer exchange (Ampure beads, Microcon, or drop dialysis), but I was always concerned about losing more sample and potentially introducing more bias. Thus, I would usually go with drop dialysis. Not sure many people do that anymore or are comfortable floating their sample on a dialysis disk in a bin of water.
skblazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2011, 07:23 AM   #9
skblazer
Member
 
Location: Massachusetts

Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 49
Default

Hi Phillip,

Many thanks for the paper.

But do you know where the huge sodium acetate come from? Is it from buffer QG to buffer the PH? But I didn't hear a lot of people report this. I'll try wash the columns twice by PE.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmiguel View Post
That looks like sodium acetate to me. A good paper on the UV spectrum of aqueous acetate is this one:

Reference Type: Journal Article
Author: Ruderman, Graciela
Author: Caffarena, Ernesto R.
Author: Mogilner, Inés G.
Author: Tolosa, Eduardo J.
Primary Title: Hydrogen Bonding of Carboxylic Acids in Aqueous Solutions—UV Spectroscopy, Viscosity, and Molecular Simulation of Acetic Acid
Journal Name: Journal of Solution Chemistry
Cover Date: 1998-10-21
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Issn: 0095-9782
Subject: Chemistry and Materials Science
Start Page: 935
End Page: 948
Volume: 27
Issue: 10
Url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022615329598
Doi: 10.1023/A:1022615329598

Is it a problem? Well to be able to see acetate on a nanodrop you probably need to be at 100 mM or more. It is not as bad as having guanidium salts in your sample for most downstream applications. But it can definitely cause problems to have 100 mM salt in your sample.

--
Phillip
skblazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2011, 07:09 AM   #10
aureias
Junior Member
 
Location: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3
Default

Hi, I recently just saw what you have seen.

The first image is from a nanodrop: Comparison of what a 1 wash PE looks like compared to straight qiaquick purification w/o gel elution.

2nd image: parallel amplicon, except this time 5x wash through a vacuum manifold. I really think its the Buffer QG that is effecting this. I'm not sure how to completely get rid of it, but the multiple washes does seem to remove it somewhat. I'm going to try to sequence it and see if the quality is sufficient.

Please let me know if you've found a way of purifying it out completely. Thanks!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg gel_elute.jpg (57.6 KB, 73 views)
File Type: jpg 100010006gel_3.jpg (48.3 KB, 66 views)

Last edited by aureias; 12-07-2011 at 08:03 AM.
aureias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2011, 07:39 AM   #11
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,832
Default

If it is really bothering you, just dilute the sample to ~500ul and concentrate it with a microcon spin column. Re-dilute a few times (on the same column), if necessary. That will get rid of acetate and/or guanidium.

But if you are getting a large peak like that, there is probably a technique issue. You might want to call Qiagen and ask for advice on how to avoid the carry over.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2011, 07:43 AM   #12
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,832
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aureias View Post
Hi, I recently just saw what you have seen.

The first image is from a nanodrop: Comparison of what a 1 wash PE looks like compared to straight qiaquick purification w/o gel elution.

This is what a 5x wash through a vacuum manifold looks like of a gel fragment. I really think its the Buffer QG that is effecting this. I'm not sure how to completely get rid of it, but the multiple washes does seem to remove it somewhat. I'm going to try to sequence it and see if the quality is sufficient.
Wait, I just re-read this. What are samples on the two runs? On the first picture I see a green peak centered around 230 nm, and a black peak around 260 nm. Which is which?

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2011, 07:56 AM   #13
aureias
Junior Member
 
Location: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3
Default

ahh sorry.

first image is a comparison of PCR amplicon purifications with either a pcr purification qiaquick or else a pcr gel purification qiaquick using standard recommended protocol.

Qiaquick Gel Purification (green line) (buffer QG)
other lines: Qiaquick PCR purification without gel extraction (buffer PB)

second image was a parallel gel purification with 5x washes. It cleared up some of the peak, but still not as clean as I'd like.

Last edited by aureias; 12-07-2011 at 08:02 AM.
aureias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2011, 08:09 AM   #14
aureias
Junior Member
 
Location: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3
Default

Hmm, gave them a call. As expected, its the salts from QG.

A few things they said might improve it is:

longer incubations in the wash buffer
incubations at 37 degrees in the wash buffer
multiple washes

I've done multiple washes, and that seems to eliminate it a fair bit, not completely, but somewhat.

I'm going to give the other options a try and will see what pops out.
aureias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2011, 08:27 AM   #15
pmiguel
Senior Member
 
Location: Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,832
Default

When we see that 230 nm peak (guanidine isothiocyanate), we just do a microcon. But we use those spin filters moderately frequently, so they are available.

--
Phillip
pmiguel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 11:26 AM   #16
mjj16
Junior Member
 
Location: PA

Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1
Default

Reviving a slightly old thread but this same problem happened to me (unfortunately before I read this). Is there a way I can further clean my samples that are already gel purified via Qiaquick? Can I apply the eluted samples back on a Qiaquick column and perform the extra washes (with incubation) as suggested here? Or does anyone have another other suggestions on how to remove the salts post Qiaquick?

Thanks in advance for any help!
mjj16 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 10:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.