SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > General

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PubMed: Exome sequencing reveals comprehensive genomic alterations across eight cance Newsbot! Literature Watch 0 10-15-2011 03:25 AM
Excellent NGS review: "Sequencing technologies - the next generation" ECO Literature Watch 8 01-14-2010 06:28 AM
Anybody interested in writing a review on a next-gen bioinformatics topic? krobison Bioinformatics 1 09-30-2009 01:38 AM
Comprehensive Sequencing Review dgt General 6 09-24-2009 04:27 PM
CHI: Next Gen Sequencing Technologies (April 23 - 24, San Diego, CA) ECO Events / Conferences 3 04-23-2008 03:41 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-25-2008, 08:35 AM   #1
ECO
--Site Admin--
 
Location: SF Bay Area, CA, USA

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,299
Default Comprehensive Review of Genomic Enrichment Technologies for Next Gen Sequencing

User sci_guy has posted a really great overview of genomic enrichment technologies in this thread: http://seqanswers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8

He sent me his original powerpoint which contains 22 slides of well organized, detailed summary points on the current state of the art in targeted sequencing enrichment technologies. It is attached to this post.

Enjoy, and please comment here or in the specific relevant forum!



[Apologies to anyone catching a duplicate on the RSS feed...had some time issues, so I reposted this.]
Attached Files
File Type: ppt Dec 2008 Enrichment Summary_from user sci_guy.ppt (4.14 MB, 534 views)
ECO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2008, 07:51 PM   #2
seqer
Member
 
Location: Palo Alto, CA

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 16
Default

In Okou et al, the enrichment is ~1000 fold, but only 1 in 60 reads are in targeted region. In Albert et al, the enrichment is 153-418 fold, but 38-76% of reads are in targeted region.

Could anybody comment why the percentage of reads mapped to targeted region is so low in Okou et al, but ok in Albert et al?

Thanks!
seqer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2008, 04:05 AM   #3
Michael L. Altshuler
Member
 
Location: Moscow

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12
Default

I wonder whether anybody has attempted to reverse the enrichment strategy, that is, to capture the repeats and let exons be washed off the microarray. The washed material could be expected to be enriched in exons and be further processed for sequencing.

For all I know and can guess it could be a robust, efficient and inexpensive way of enrichment.
Michael L. Altshuler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 06:02 AM   #4
sci_guy
Member
 
Location: Sydney, Australia

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 81
Default

Interesting thought Michael.

The hyb kinetics would change a great deal. For example if you designed a series of oligos around the human LINE1 repeat consensus sequence you are now trying to capture over 20% of the genome (LINE1 sequences) with your oligos instead of capturing a megabase or two of exons (~0.05% of the genome). A liquid phase capture using a small library of oligos bound to magnetic beads or suchlike which are designed around repeat consensus sequences might be the way to go.
sci_guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 08:56 AM   #5
apfejes
Senior Member
 
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 236
Default

That is interesting. For Solexa based applications, current alignment strategies don't handle repeats wel, and fragments aligning to repeats are most often thrown out - so the only significant advantage to removing these sequences might be in freeing up some additional capacity of a flow cell, eg, if you go from ~65% to 90% mappability of CFU.

It might be worth a try, if that's the case.
__________________
The more you know, the more you know you don't know. —Aristotle
apfejes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2008, 02:34 AM   #6
Michael L. Altshuler
Member
 
Location: Moscow

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12
Wink Density gradient centrifugation is another enrichment strategy

Density gradient centrifugation would move most of the repeats to the satellite DNA peak(s).
As an initial step in the enrichment process it could probably alleviate the needle-in-the-hay situation during the subsequent array-based enrichment for the unique DNA sequences or even replace the arrays. Opinions?
Michael L. Altshuler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 09:43 AM   #7
mcraja
Junior Member
 
Location: india

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1
Thumbs up agilent sureselect on array capture

We are using Agilent's SureSelect on array capture method and "reverse enrichment" is 50% of what actualy happens, the repeat regions are removed by the use of Cot1 DNA in the hyb buffer. The target regions are captured on the array, there is more than 1000 fold enrichment of targted regions and > 99% of the targted regions are typically captured and more than 50% of the sequence is from targeted exons.

Raja
(will be posting updates at www.nextgenseq.com)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael L. Altshuler View Post
I wonder whether anybody has attempted to reverse the enrichment strategy, that is, to capture the repeats and let exons be washed off the microarray. The washed material could be expected to be enriched in exons and be further processed for sequencing.

For all I know and can guess it could be a robust, efficient and inexpensive way of enrichment.
mcraja 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 03:58 AM.


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