Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • devorevo
    Junior Member
    • Apr 2016
    • 2

    48 v 96 multiplexing

    I have approximately 200 samples I'm planning to sequence. I originally planed on multiplexing (Illumina Nextera XT) 96 samples to make two libraries, and then sequence a library per lane for a total of two lanes. I talked to someone in our core facility about the plan and they recommended we multiplex to a maximum of 46 samples (which would then require 4 lanes total...doubling our sequencing costs) due to the possibility of some samples becoming over/underrepresented in number of reads.

    I talked with a rep from Illumina and they said multiplexing to 96 should be fine as long as the initial sample inputs amounts are the same. We quantify our samples with Qubit HS.

    Any experience or advice on multiplexing 48 v 96?
  • fanli
    Senior Member
    • Jul 2014
    • 197

    #2
    Depends how much sequencing depth you need per sample..

    Comment

    • devorevo
      Junior Member
      • Apr 2016
      • 2

      #3
      Originally posted by fanli View Post
      Depends how much sequencing depth you need per sample..
      We're looking at a minimum of ~1M reads per sample and we plan on using a system that will generate ~330M reads per lane. Because of our lower minimum threshold, we're not too concerned if the average read is 3.4M v 6.8M.

      Comment

      • fanli
        Senior Member
        • Jul 2014
        • 197

        #4
        I'd be okay with the 96-plex then. You can always repool and sequence a third run if some samples need more depth.

        For reference, attached is the indexing breakdown we got recently from a pool of ~130 Nextera XT libraries.
        Attached Files

        Comment

        Latest Articles

        Collapse

        • GATTACAT
          Reply to Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
          by GATTACAT
          Love this - good data definitely starts from good input, and poor input can only give relatively poor data. I particularly like the mention of Nanodrop/absorbance based methods for quantification. It's such a toss up if you'll get an accurate reading or what amounts to a randomly generated number, and a lot of library/sequencing related issues can be traced back to poor quant.
          07-01-2026, 11:43 AM
        • SEQadmin2
          Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
          by SEQadmin2


          I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

          Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
          06-18-2026, 07:11 AM

        ad_right_rmr

        Collapse

        News

        Collapse

        Topics Statistics Last Post
        Started by SEQadmin2, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
        0 responses
        12 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
        0 responses
        14 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
        0 responses
        20 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
        0 responses
        54 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Working...