Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Genohub
    replied
    I'm aware of the RNA ligase biases in small RNA / RNA-Seq. Have you seen any papers about T4 DNA Ligase bias in DNA-Seq applications. I don't think this has been looked at as carefully. If anyone has used 'in-line' adapter barcodes during ligation, they may be in a unique position to comment.

    - Genohub

    Leave a comment:


  • luc
    replied
    Thanks a lot for the links Genohub!

    I have the impression, the authors of this specific paper have completely forgotten about any base-specific biases of enzymes involved in end-repair, A-tailing, and ligation.

    E.g. ligation bias:
    Ancient DNA extracts consist of a mixture of endogenous molecules and contaminant DNA templates, often originating from environmental microbes. These two populations of templates exhibit different chemical characteristics, with the former showing depurination and cytosine deamination by-products, resulting from post-mortem DNA damage. Such chemical modifications can interfere with the molecular tools used for building second-generation DNA libraries, and limit our ability to fully characterize the true complexity of ancient DNA extracts. In this study, we first use fresh DNA extracts to demonstrate that library preparation based on adapter ligation at AT-overhangs are biased against DNA templates starting with thymine residues, contrarily to blunt-end adapter ligation. We observe the same bias on fresh DNA extracts sheared on Bioruptor, Covaris and nebulizers. This contradicts previous reports suggesting that this bias could originate from the methods used for shearing DNA. This also suggests that AT-overhang adapter ligation efficiency is affected in a sequence-dependent manner and results in an uneven representation of different genomic contexts. We then show how this bias could affect the base composition of ancient DNA libraries prepared following AT-overhang ligation, mainly by limiting the ability to ligate DNA templates starting with thymines and therefore deaminated cytosines. This results in particular nucleotide misincorporation damage patterns, deviating from the signature generally expected for authenticating ancient sequence data. Consequently, we show that models adequate for estimating post-mortem DNA damage levels must be robust to the molecular tools used for building ancient DNA libraries.



    Originally posted by Genohub View Post
    Another interesting paper on Non-random DNA fragmentation in next-generation sequencing: http://www.nature.com/srep/2014/1403...srep04532.html

    - Genohub

    Leave a comment:


  • Genohub
    replied
    Another interesting paper on Non-random DNA fragmentation in next-generation sequencing: http://www.nature.com/srep/2014/1403...srep04532.html

    - Genohub

    Leave a comment:


  • Genohub
    replied
    Interesting paper examines transcriptome reassembly and determines it is sensitive to RNA fragmentation technique. Concludes that Zn mediated fragmentation provides a better transcript ID compared to cleavage by RNase III: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...46202313000789

    I wonder if this has been tested with Mg.

    - Genohub

    Leave a comment:


  • luc
    replied
    Originally posted by kshazand View Post
    luc,
    Ppl looked into sonicated DNA and it does have all sorts of damages, hence my question.
    Hi kshazand,

    I would be interested in data related to this. Could you point me to them?

    The Knierim et al paper touches mostly on outdated methods:
    Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technologies are gaining importance in the routine clinical diagnostic setting. It is thus desirable to simplify the workflow for high-throughput diagnostics. Fragmentation of DNA is a crucial step for preparation of template libraries and various methods are currently known. Here we evaluated the performance of nebulization, sonication and random enzymatic digestion of long-range PCR products on the results of NGS. All three methods produced high-quality sequencing libraries for the 454 platform. However, if long-range PCR products of different length were pooled equimolarly, sequence coverage drastically dropped for fragments below 3,000 bp. All three methods performed equally well with regard to overall sequence quality (PHRED) and read length. Enzymatic fragmentation showed highest consistency between three library preparations but performed slightly worse than sonication and nebulization with regard to insertions/deletions in the raw sequence reads. After filtering for homopolymer errors, enzymatic fragmentation performed best if compared to the results of classic Sanger sequencing. As the overall performance of all three methods was equal with only minor differences, a fragmentation method can be chosen solely according to lab facilities, feasibility and experimental design.

    Leave a comment:


  • Genohub
    replied
    6 Methods to Fragment DNA or RNA for NGS

    These are the 6 main methods used to fragment DNA or RNA for NGS: http://blog.genohub.com/fragmentatio...-library-prep/

    I'd be interested to see if there have been any detailed studies comparing the bias introduced by each of these.

    - Genohub

    Leave a comment:


  • rnaeye
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • rnaeye
    replied
    I believe you need to ask that to NEB.

    Leave a comment:


  • kshazand
    replied
    Originally posted by rnaeye View Post
    kshazand,
    Fragmentase is enzyme based but does not use restriction enzyme.
    What enzymes are they then?

    Leave a comment:


  • kshazand
    replied
    Originally posted by luc View Post
    The transposase protocols (nextera et al.) are the other alternative, of course also with some biases.
    In general I guess/assume sonication will not introduce any significant biases ( I do not know if anybody has looked at it); at least not to a degree that they will not be trumped by biases of the required downstream enzymatic processes. If you can create your libraries PCR-free after sonication you should have very few worries.
    luc,
    Ppl looked into sonicated DNA and it does have all sorts of damages, hence my question.

    Leave a comment:


  • rnaeye
    replied
    kshazand,
    Fragmentase is enzyme based but does not use restriction enzyme.

    Leave a comment:


  • luc
    replied
    The transposase protocols (nextera et al.) are the other alternative, of course also with some biases.
    In general I guess/assume sonication will not introduce any significant biases ( I do not know if anybody has looked at it); at least not to a degree that they will not be trumped by biases of the required downstream enzymatic processes. If you can create your libraries PCR-free after sonication you should have very few worries.

    Originally posted by kshazand View Post
    Yes thank you, I know Fragmentase, but since it is mainly based on restriction enzymes, the output has some bias. What other "many alternatives" are you refering to?

    Leave a comment:


  • kshazand
    replied
    Yes thank you, I know Fragmentase, but since it is mainly based on restriction enzymes, the output has some bias. What other "many alternatives" are you refering to?

    Leave a comment:


  • rnaeye
    replied
    NEB has an enzyme called Fragmentase for this purpose. Maybe one of many alternatives.
    This product generates dsDNA breaks randomly in a time-dependent manner to yield 50-1,000 bp DNA fragments depending on reaction time.

    Leave a comment:


  • kshazand
    started a topic DNA fragmentation methods

    DNA fragmentation methods

    Hi all,
    Different physical damages are made to DNA during sonication. Yet, we all use Covaris and other similar sonicators for library prep.
    I would like to know how many of my colleagues have observed or even looked at the DNA state and what you think of potential alternatives to shearing.
    Kamran

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • seqadmin
    Advancing Precision Medicine for Rare Diseases in Children
    by seqadmin




    Many organizations study rare diseases, but few have a mission as impactful as Rady Children’s Institute for Genomic Medicine (RCIGM). “We are all about changing outcomes for children,” explained Dr. Stephen Kingsmore, President and CEO of the group. The institute’s initial goal was to provide rapid diagnoses for critically ill children and shorten their diagnostic odyssey, a term used to describe the long and arduous process it takes patients to obtain an accurate...
    12-16-2024, 07:57 AM
  • seqadmin
    Recent Advances in Sequencing Technologies
    by seqadmin



    Innovations in next-generation sequencing technologies and techniques are driving more precise and comprehensive exploration of complex biological systems. Current advancements include improved accessibility for long-read sequencing and significant progress in single-cell and 3D genomics. This article explores some of the most impactful developments in the field over the past year.

    Long-Read Sequencing
    Long-read sequencing has seen remarkable advancements,...
    12-02-2024, 01:49 PM

ad_right_rmr

Collapse

News

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by seqadmin, 12-17-2024, 10:28 AM
0 responses
27 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 12-13-2024, 08:24 AM
0 responses
43 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 12-12-2024, 07:41 AM
0 responses
29 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 12-11-2024, 07:45 AM
0 responses
42 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Working...
X