Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • HESmith
    Senior Member
    • Oct 2009
    • 512

    #1

    Accuprime amplification and TruSeq incompatibility?

    I'm trying to use the Broad Institute's recommendations for PCR amplification to minimize library bias (Accuprime polymerase + modified cycling parameters; described here). The protocol works fine with the old sample prep kits, but not with the TruSeq components - I can amplify the library with Illumina's TruSeq reagents, but not Accuprime. Has anyone else observed this problem?

    Harold
  • Chipper
    Senior Member
    • Mar 2008
    • 323

    #2
    Originally posted by HESmith View Post
    I'm trying to use the Broad Institute's recommendations for PCR amplification to minimize library bias (Accuprime polymerase + modified cycling parameters; described here). The protocol works fine with the old sample prep kits, but not with the TruSeq components - I can amplify the library with Illumina's TruSeq reagents, but not Accuprime. Has anyone else observed this problem?

    Harold
    I just got the same results (very low yield). It would be interesting to know why, according to the manual it contains "a thermostable accessory protein enhances specific primer-template hybridization during every cycle of PCR". Perhaps it needs lower annealing temp, did you use the same for both kits? I used 65*C with works well with Pfu Ultra on the same samples.

    Comment

    • HESmith
      Senior Member
      • Oct 2009
      • 512

      #3
      I followed the published protocol exactly (e.g., annealing/extension @ 65C), except I replaced 2 ul of primers PE 1.0 and 2.0 w/ 5 ul of the primer cocktail mix from the Truseq kit (and adjusted the volume accordingly). It works well as published (with the older PE adapters and primers) but not with Truseq adapters and primers. I suspect that the primers are modified, or that the cocktail contains a component that inhibits the Accuprime enzyme. Glad to hear that I'm not the only person with this problem.

      Comment

      • Dodu
        Junior Member
        • Dec 2009
        • 2

        #4
        Have you tried to lower annealing temperature to 60C as described in the TruSeq protocol? It may help primer binds to template.

        Comment

        • pmiguel
          Senior Member
          • Aug 2008
          • 2328

          #5
          Originally posted by HESmith View Post
          I followed the published protocol exactly (e.g., annealing/extension @ 65C), except I replaced 2 ul of primers PE 1.0 and 2.0 w/ 5 ul of the primer cocktail mix from the Truseq kit (and adjusted the volume accordingly). It works well as published (with the older PE adapters and primers) but not with Truseq adapters and primers. I suspect that the primers are modified, or that the cocktail contains a component that inhibits the Accuprime enzyme. Glad to hear that I'm not the only person with this problem.
          The TruSeq primers migrate slower during electrophoresis on an bioanalyzer chip than one would expect from their presumptive molecular weight. (I usually see them around 80 nt.) So, I think it is likely they are modified. Possibly LNA or something LNA-like?

          --
          Phillip

          Comment

          Latest Articles

          Collapse

          • SEQadmin2
            How Immunogenomics Decodes Immunity’s Genetic Blueprint
            by SEQadmin2




            The immune system’s power comes from its genetic diversity, allowing myriad threats to be neutralized through first recognizing foreign antigens. That diversity is also what makes the immune system so difficult to study. Recent advances in sequencing technology and computational biology, however, are giving researchers new tools to understand immune responses and immune-related diseases in greater detail.

            This convergence of genetics, immunology, and computation...
            Today, 05:41 AM
          • 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

          ad_right_rmr

          Collapse

          News

          Collapse

          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by SEQadmin2, 08-24-2026, 10:32 AM
          0 responses
          42 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 08-20-2026, 11:17 AM
          0 responses
          48 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 08-18-2026, 10:05 AM
          0 responses
          53 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 08-13-2026, 12:22 PM
          0 responses
          50 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Working...