Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • lyndaben
    Member
    • May 2011
    • 10

    #1

    which kit for RRBS?

    Any advice on which kit to use for RRBS? I'm looking at Epignome Methyl-Seq; NuGen Ovation Ultra low Methyl-seq; Bioo NEXTflex bisulfite sequencing kit,
    The Illumina web site is confusing - their RRBS workflow includes ligation of methylated adapters which are no longer available. I called to ask about the Epignome kit for RRBS and was advised not to do RRBS at all and use microarrays (or WGBS - which is cost prohibitive for a new lab start-up). Any advice for a newbie to RRBS would be much appreciated

    Ultimately I want to use FFPE samples - impossible?
  • amdic2
    Junior Member
    • Jul 2011
    • 6

    #2
    Which kit for RRBS

    Dear lyndaben,
    Have you decided which kit you are going to use?
    I am also currently looking at several options.
    The protocol published by Boyle et al. (2012) Genome Biology appears quite easy to optimize. I am also interested by the NextFlex kit.
    By the way, Boyle et al. mentionned to used the bisulfite conversion protocol for FFPE samples with ANY samples. It thus doesn't appear to be a problem?
    Cheers,
    Anne-Marie

    Comment

    • lyndaben
      Member
      • May 2011
      • 10

      #3
      I opted for the NuGEN Ovation kit. They provided me with a protocol addition for RRBS. It was just delivered this week so I have not had the chance to try it yet

      Comment

      • MasterSeq
        Junior Member
        • Dec 2011
        • 4

        #4
        I know this is an old thread but this could be useful for somebody: NuGEN just launched a kit specifically for RRBS which should be much better than using their Methyl-Seq kit. It uses direct ligation from MspI digestion, only one bead purification and no need for phiX spike-in to deal with the lack of diversity coming from the MspI ends.

        Comment

        • lyndaben
          Member
          • May 2011
          • 10

          #5
          The new kit will be better hopefully. A note of caution to anyone using the old kit with the modified RRBS protocol: The first sequencing run we multiplexed with RNAseq samples and everything was great and the data looks good. This last time we multiplexed with PhiX (in 6 of 8 lanes) as recommended by NuGEN and we are having problems with the data (only 3-10M reads for the RRBS samples). On the same flow cell, two of the lanes were multiplexed with RNAseq and we got 30M reads for the RRBS samples, so we know it was not a sequencing problem or a library problem.

          Comment

          • chapmandu2
            Junior Member
            • Apr 2009
            • 4

            #6
            Out of interest, has anyone tried the Methyl-Seq hybrid capture sequencing method from Agilent instead of RRBS?

            Comment

            • nucacidhunter
              Jafar Jabbari
              • Jan 2013
              • 1250

              #7
              This kit does not seem to be popular. I could not find any publication that have used it nor Agilent Techsupport was able to provide any reference. It would cost more than RRBS for the same coverage of target region, noting that target or covered regions are different between two methods.

              Comment

              • Genohub
                Registered Vendor
                • Mar 2013
                • 210

                #8
                Methyl-DNA Sequencing

                We've posted several different flavors of Methyl-DNA sequencing. Use the links at the end of the post to see the kits that NGS service providers on Genohub use.

                - Genohub

                Comment

                • NuGEN
                  Registered Vendor
                  • Jun 2010
                  • 22

                  #9
                  Dedicated kit for RRBS from NuGEN

                  I wanted to comment that NuGEN has recently launched a dedicated kit for RRBS, the Ovation RRBS Methyl-Seq System - details can found here

                  Comment

                  • Faria
                    Junior Member
                    • Dec 2014
                    • 9

                    #10
                    Originally posted by lyndaben View Post
                    I opted for the NuGEN Ovation kit. They provided me with a protocol addition for RRBS. It was just delivered this week so I have not had the chance to try it yet
                    Dear lyndaben,

                    How did your data turn out? Did you have any issues demultiplexing your samples? We recently used the kit. The libraries looked great but we are having issues with demultiplexing. Any advice/ tricks?

                    Thanks for your time

                    Comment

                    • lyndaben
                      Member
                      • May 2011
                      • 10

                      #11
                      We used the NuGEN Ovation kit with great results when we multiplexed our samples with RNA-seq samples. When we multiplexed some RRBS libraries with PhiX we had problems with demultiplexing but when we re-sequenced the same samples and multiplexed with RNA-seq libraries we had no problems at all.

                      We are now making libraries from their new Ovation RRBS Methyl-seq kit. You do not need to multiplex with high quantities of complex libraries with this kit. Library construction is working great but we haven't sequenced any yet.

                      BTW, we had the same demultiplexing problem when we had some TrueMethyl-seq RRBS and oxRRBS libraries sequenced with PhiX and again no problem when the same libraries were re-sequenced with some RNA-seq libraries

                      Comment

                      • nucacidhunter
                        Jafar Jabbari
                        • Jan 2013
                        • 1250

                        #12
                        Demultiplexing rate with new kit is low with or without PhiX. Undetermined folder reads have index but it seems to have various sequences. NuGEN should have seen this issue if they sequenced libraries according to their recommendation.

                        Comment

                        • Faria
                          Junior Member
                          • Dec 2014
                          • 9

                          #13
                          Would you mind sharing your % undertermined reads?

                          Comment

                          • nucacidhunter
                            Jafar Jabbari
                            • Jan 2013
                            • 1250

                            #14
                            15-30% depending on lane. Multiplexing level does not seem to have any effect.

                            Comment

                            • lyndaben
                              Member
                              • May 2011
                              • 10

                              #15
                              Faria, did you use the old kit or the new kit?

                              Comment

                              Latest Articles

                              Collapse

                              • SEQadmin2
                                Beyond CRISPR/Cas9: Understand, Choose, and Use the Right Genome Editing Tool
                                by SEQadmin2



                                CRISPR/Cas9 sparked the gene editing revolution for both research and therapeutics.1 But this system still showed severe issues that limited its applications. The most prominent were the heavy reliance on PAM sequences, delivery limitations, double-stranded breaks that prompt unintended edits and cell death, and editing inefficiency (both in targeting and in knock-in reliability).

                                Despite this, “CRISPR helped turn genome editing from a specialized technique into
                                ...
                                07-31-2026, 11:01 AM
                              • SEQadmin2
                                Proteomic Platforms: How to Choose the Right Analytical Strategy to Improve Detection and Clinical Applications
                                by SEQadmin2


                                Proteomics platforms are evolving rapidly, with advances in mass spectrometry and affinity-based approaches expanding what researchers can detect and at what scale. As the field moves toward deeper proteome coverage and clinical applications, scientists face an increasingly complex landscape of tools. This article will explore how researchers are navigating these choices to find the right platform for their work.

                                The systematic characterization of the human proteome has
                                ...
                                07-20-2026, 11:48 AM

                              ad_right_rmr

                              Collapse

                              News

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by SEQadmin2, 08-06-2026, 07:41 AM
                              0 responses
                              20 views
                              0 reactions
                              Last Post SEQadmin2  
                              Started by SEQadmin2, 08-03-2026, 10:13 AM
                              0 responses
                              33 views
                              0 reactions
                              Last Post SEQadmin2  
                              Started by SEQadmin2, 07-31-2026, 02:55 AM
                              0 responses
                              43 views
                              0 reactions
                              Last Post SEQadmin2  
                              Started by SEQadmin2, 07-24-2026, 12:17 PM
                              0 responses
                              26 views
                              0 reactions
                              Last Post SEQadmin2  
                              Working...