Has anyone examined 16S diversity (of a single DNA extraction) using an Adapter-MID primer set and compared it to the amplicon generated using otherwise identical unbarcoded, adapterless primers (with Adapter-MID ligated to the amplicon)? It seems that the latter would be an easy way to reduce the headache of PCR-optimization for tricky primers and reduce potential barcode bias.
To perform the ligation, would it be best to use a protocol such as this by Zheng et al. 2010 and use the Lib-A kit?
To perform the ligation, would it be best to use a protocol such as this by Zheng et al. 2010 and use the Lib-A kit?
Adapter ligation was conducted in a 25 µl reaction with 1× slow ligation buffer, 0.4 pmol of each of the A4 and B adapter (Invitrogen, USA) and T4 DNA Ligase 180 U (Enzymatics, MA, USA). We used the FLX Titanium adapter A4 (GS multiplex identifier number 4) because this adapter had performed well in previous experiments in our lab. The ligation reaction was incubated at 22°C over night, purified by AMPure beads (17.5 µl, 70% volume) and eluted in 25 µl TE. The eluted DNA was treated with 8 U Bst DNA polymerase Large Fragment (New England Biolabs), to fill in the 3′-junction nick between the adapter and sample DNA in a 30 µl reaction with 1× fill-in buffer, 30 µM dNTP and incubated at 37°C for 20 min. The double-stranded DNA library was purified with AMPure beads (21 µl, 70% volume) and eluted in 30 µl TE.
Comment