Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • gendxdoc
    Member
    • Mar 2008
    • 12

    Target enrichment from pooled libraries

    Does anyone have any experience performing target enrichment from pooled libraries ? We're very interested in performing SureSelect (Agilent) in-solution capture (or array-based capture) with pooled libraries (SOLiD or Illumina). We'd like to pool 16 barcoded libraries and perform a single enrichment. Has anyone tried this ?

    We would expect there to be a limit to the number of individuals that can be pooled, while still retaining sufficient sequence complexity after hybridization across all targets.
  • wjeck
    Member
    • Mar 2009
    • 39

    #2
    We're interested in doing what sounds like a nearly identical procedure at our institution. We're planning on using Illumina's multiplexing (barcoding) kit followed by SureSelect. We'd love to know the expected efficiency and variation in read representation between subsamples.

    Comment

    • elaney_k
      Member
      • Mar 2008
      • 55

      #3
      Hi guys,

      I've enriched a set of 9 indexed samples using 1 Agilent sureselect assay. I got very even representation of the indexed samples in the final sequenced data (9.4-11.7% representation of each indexed sample in the final pool).
      I did have a lot of off-target reads though, on average only 21% of our reads were on-target, however I had relaxed the default repeat masking during array design to allow me to design baits for regions normally masked and am pretty sure it's responsible for most of the off-target reads.

      My target was just over 300Kb and I got on average just under 1700 fold enrichment of my target region so I was fairly pleased with the results- not bad for a first go

      I think expected on-target reads is ~60% (if you don't mess with the repeat masker!). I'm pretty sure we will increase our on-target reads with our next array design.

      Elaine

      Comment

      • gendxdoc
        Member
        • Mar 2008
        • 12

        #4
        Elaine -- This is a good result ! We're getting ready to hybridize a pool of 16 indexed libraries with a SureSelect assay targeted at ~1.5Mb. We'll let you know how it goes.
        Michael

        Comment

        • wjeck
          Member
          • Mar 2009
          • 39

          #5
          This is great news, and I'll look forward to more posts about the effectiveness of the protocol. We'll be ordering our selection kit soon and I'll do my best to post with the quality of our results as well.

          Comment

          • brasj
            Member
            • Aug 2008
            • 13

            #6
            Originally posted by elaney_k View Post
            Hi guys,

            I've enriched a set of 9 indexed samples using 1 Agilent sureselect assay. I got very even representation of the indexed samples in the final sequenced data (9.4-11.7% representation of each indexed sample in the final pool).
            I did have a lot of off-target reads though, on average only 21% of our reads were on-target, however I had relaxed the default repeat masking during array design to allow me to design baits for regions normally masked and am pretty sure it's responsible for most of the off-target reads.

            My target was just over 300Kb and I got on average just under 1700 fold enrichment of my target region so I was fairly pleased with the results- not bad for a first go

            I think expected on-target reads is ~60% (if you don't mess with the repeat masker!). I'm pretty sure we will increase our on-target reads with our next array design.

            Elaine
            Hi Elaine,

            those are indeed good results - and I agree that messing with the repeat masker may be the sole reason for lower on-target reads.

            How did you quantify your samples prior to pooling them? Was this bioanalyzer, qpcr, nanodrop....?

            Thanks!

            Comment

            • elaney_k
              Member
              • Mar 2008
              • 55

              #7
              Thanks guys!

              I quantified the samples using a qubit flourimeter (Invitrogen) as it can quantify dsDNA even in the presence of ssDNA e.g. primers. I wouldn't recommend a nanodrop or bioanalyzer for quantification.

              Elaine

              Comment

              • brasj
                Member
                • Aug 2008
                • 13

                #8
                Thanks Elaine,

                I'll be using the qpcr approach - I agree on the nanodrop and bioanalyzer remark. unfortunately we don't have the qubit flourimeter - would make it a lot easier than the qpcr, IMO.

                Comment

                • elaney_k
                  Member
                  • Mar 2008
                  • 55

                  #9
                  Hi guys,

                  Shameless plug I know but we finally managed to publish the multiplex target enrichment study for anyone that's still interested in it

                  Multiplex Target Enrichment Using DNA Indexing for Ultra-High Throughput SNP Detection. Kenny EM, Cormican P, Gilks WP, Gates AS, O'Dushlaine CT, Pinto C, Corvin AP, Gill M, Morris DW. DNA Res. 2010 Dec 16 PMID: 21163834

                  Elaine

                  Comment

                  Latest Articles

                  Collapse

                  • 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
                  • SEQadmin2
                    From Collection to Sequencing: Why Sample Preparation and Preservation Define Sequencing Data
                    by SEQadmin2


                    Data variability is still an issue in sequencing technologies despite the advances in reproducibility and accuracy of these platforms. But the problem does not originate in the sequencing itself, but in the previous steps, before the sample reaches the sequencer.


                    The first step is collection, followed by preservation and sample preparation for analysis. Most scientists overlook those steps, but not being careful might just be skewing the experiment’s results.
                    ...
                    06-02-2026, 10:05 AM

                  ad_right_rmr

                  Collapse

                  News

                  Collapse

                  Topics Statistics Last Post
                  Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
                  0 responses
                  26 views
                  0 reactions
                  Last Post SEQadmin2  
                  Started by SEQadmin2, 06-09-2026, 11:58 AM
                  0 responses
                  43 views
                  0 reactions
                  Last Post SEQadmin2  
                  Started by SEQadmin2, 06-05-2026, 10:09 AM
                  0 responses
                  48 views
                  0 reactions
                  Last Post SEQadmin2  
                  Started by SEQadmin2, 06-04-2026, 08:59 AM
                  0 responses
                  49 views
                  0 reactions
                  Last Post SEQadmin2  
                  Working...