Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • nucacidhunter
    replied
    Originally posted by M4TTN View Post
    i.e. the pure adapter dimer junction should be: GCTCTTCCGATC/GATCGGAAGAGC
    But we see (I think): GCTCTTCCGATCtaGATCGGAAGAGC

    Or rather: in the sequence trace we see: AGATCGGAAGAGC...

    And since the read primer ends: ...GCTCTTCCGATCT

    This presumably means that the overhanging T is present (for the read primer to work) and an A has been added upstream of the GATCGGAA...

    So...questions:
    Would an oligo that spans this junction inhibit PCR?
    What is the role of the LNA within this oligo?
    I think adapter-dimer formation is more complex. I would suggest analysing a TruSeq Universal and Index adapter for hetero-dimer formation for instance using OligoAnalyzer. You will see that there is more than one way for hetero-dimer formation with relatively low Delta Gs (they will anneal during annealing step) and each of those can be extended and then those products can form new versions of hetero-dimers in the following cycles.

    In your target range the best way for getting rid of dimers is preventing or reducing dimer formation by careful titration of adapters or using dimer-free adapter technology.

    PS. I have not seen any proof that Illumina uses LNA technology in their adapter oligos but LNA will increase the stability of annealed adapter oligos.
    Last edited by nucacidhunter; 08-09-2016, 10:22 PM. Reason: Added more info

    Leave a comment:


  • M4TTN
    replied
    Dear NextGenSeq, (apologies for dragging up an old post!)

    I have a DNA enrichment project where our inserts range from only 40bp and up. We'd like to get them all.

    We've just done a run and it is clear that we have sequenced a lot of adapter dimers (we expected that to be the case from the bioanalyser trace). My question is how applicable your strategy for dimer removal would be to standard Illumina DNA-DNA adapter dimer junctions? From the % base trace on MiSeq reporter it appears that most of the adapter junctions have gained an A (complementary to the overhanging T).

    i.e. the pure adapter dimer junction should be: GCTCTTCCGATC/GATCGGAAGAGC
    But we see (I think): GCTCTTCCGATCtaGATCGGAAGAGC

    Or rather: in the sequence trace we see: AGATCGGAAGAGC...

    And since the read primer ends: ...GCTCTTCCGATCT

    This presumably means that the overhanging T is present (for the read primer to work) and an A has been added upstream of the GATCGGAA...

    So...questions:
    Would an oligo that spans this junction inhibit PCR?
    What is the role of the LNA within this oligo?
    Last edited by M4TTN; 08-09-2016, 10:36 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • NextGenSeq
    replied

    Reduction of non-insert sequence reads by dimer eliminator LNA oligonucleotide for small RNA deep sequencing


    Here we describe a method for constructing small RNA libraries for high throughput sequencing in which we have made a significant improvement to commonly available standard protocols. We added a locked nucleic acid (LNA) oligonucleotide—named dimer eliminator—that is complementary to the adapter-dimer ligation products during the reverse transcription reaction. It reduces adapter-dimers, which often contaminate standard libraries and increase the number of non-insert sequence reads.

    http://www.biotechniques.com/Biotech...es-304403.html

    Tufts LNA Adapter Protocol

    Leave a comment:


  • luc
    replied
    It seems unlikely that LNA bases would be used - to my knowledge, LNA in the template inhibits most polymerases.
    I assume the phosphorothioate linkage helps predominantly preventing 3’ to 5’ exonuclease activity of the ligase - reducing adapter dimers.
    We too, had good experiences with the Bioo adapters though.

    Leave a comment:


  • nucacidhunter
    replied
    I have not seen any reference, but anecdotally I have been told that through unknown mechanism phosphorothioate linkage increases ligation efficiency with increasing number of linkages. That is the reason that 454 adapters had 5 phosphorothioate linkages not just one which is enough for protection against 3’ to 5’ exonuclease activity of enzymes.
    Last edited by nucacidhunter; 03-25-2015, 04:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • pmiguel
    replied
    Originally posted by NextGenSeq View Post
    Are your adapters homebrew also?

    The Illumina adapters have modifications at the 3' end which increases ligation efficiency
    (see the sticky)
    Originally posted by NextGenSeq View Post
    Under the Illumina forum
    Bridged amplification & clustering followed by sequencing by synthesis. (Genome Analyzer / HiSeq / MiSeq)


    People use either phosphothioate or LNA between the last two 3' bases. If you don't do this you will get much more adapter artifacts.

    We've found that the Bioo adapters give fewer adapter artifacts than even purchased Illumina adapters.
    Okay, but phosphorothiate linkages are said to protect the linkage against some types of exonuclease activity not "increase the ligation efficiency". I gather LNA linkages stabilize correct base stacking interactions -- but would a single base overhang with an LNA linkage really result in a more efficient ligation?

    Interesting about the bioo adapters -- to what do you attribute their giving you fewer artifacts? (Do they use LNAs?)

    --
    Phillip

    Leave a comment:


  • NextGenSeq
    replied
    Under the Illumina forum
    Bridged amplification & clustering followed by sequencing by synthesis. (Genome Analyzer / HiSeq / MiSeq)


    People use either phosphothioate or LNA between the last two 3' bases. If you don't do this you will get much more adapter artifacts.

    We've found that the Bioo adapters give fewer adapter artifacts than even purchased Illumina adapters.

    Leave a comment:


  • pmiguel
    replied
    Originally posted by NextGenSeq View Post
    Are your adapters homebrew also?

    The Illumina adapters have modifications at the 3' end which increases ligation efficiency
    (see the sticky)
    Eh? What "sticky"?
    What do you mean "increases ligation efficiency"?

    --
    Phillip

    Leave a comment:


  • NextGenSeq
    replied
    Are your adapters homebrew also?

    The Illumina adapters have modifications at the 3' end which increases ligation efficiency
    (see the sticky)

    Leave a comment:


  • Hoban
    replied
    Originally posted by ojm101 View Post
    The concentrations are whatever Beckman Coulter AMPureXP beads are. I'm not aware of the specific numbers. Same story with the competitor.

    https://www.beckmancoulter.com/wsrpo...n%2Findex.htm/

    Have you tried using lower concentrations (0.5x-1x) yet? I'm interested to see the result of that.

    Leave a comment:


  • pmiguel
    replied
    Under the conditions your did those clean-ups it looks like you need to go to lower Ampure amounts. Try 0.6x and 0.8x, to get an idea.
    Here are some factors that may impact precipitation:
    -Time precipitated
    -Salt, concentration. Divalent cations are said to be much more effective at preciptitation (eg Mg++) The salt concentration is cranked sky high in PEG ppts, so it may not be a factor.
    -Temperature during precipitation.

    Since you are probably controlling those factors pretty well, it is probably either a weird batch of ampure--possibly with higher PEG than it should have or maybe it went through a freeze-thaw that damaged the beads.
    Alternatively, maybe the bead pellets aren't getting washed sufficiently? There is quite a bit of solvent volume in the pellet initially. That will contain lots of the lowest molecular weight band. If it doesn't get fully mix and diluted out, it might explain why you are retaining so much of the 100bp band.

    But really I would suggest just doing a series of Ampures at 0.1x intervals from 0.5x to 1.0x on your 100 bp ladder to find where you get highest 300bp/100bp recovery ratio.

    Also, if necessary, you could do two Ampures in a row. This might have more impact than you are expecting. Say 0.9x is giving 90% recovery of 300bp and 30% recovery of 100bp. After a 2nd ampure you expect about 81% (.9^2) recovery of 300bp and 9% (.3^2) of 100bp.

    --
    Phillip

    Leave a comment:


  • nucacidhunter
    replied
    Originally posted by ojm101 View Post
    Hi All,

    I have been having some trouble with 120 bp adapter dimers showing up after ligation during Illumina library prep. We have a homebrew system here, and previously we incorporated SPRIselect (distinct from AMPure XP) but we are phasing that out because of the low yield issues and subsequent bias. As soon as we took out SPRIselect, we started seeing adapter dimers all over the place, which prompted us to use a lower (<1.8x) ratio of AMPure beads to "cut" the dimers out.


    I wonder if you could post Electropherogram of a ligation reaction before and after bead clean up as well as the library after PCR (before any clean up) for the same sample. 0.9x bead ratio should clean 100 bp fragments.

    Leave a comment:


  • ojm101
    replied
    The concentrations are whatever Beckman Coulter AMPureXP beads are. I'm not aware of the specific numbers. Same story with the competitor.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hoban
    replied
    What PEG concentration are you using and what NaCl concentration are you using?

    Leave a comment:


  • ojm101
    replied
    I've attached the image of my gel. The first well is just ladder. Afterwards, there are 4 samples cleaned up with ampure beads and 2 samples cleaned up with a competing brand.

    The order of the ratios is 0.9x, 1.2x, 0.9x, 1.2x, 0.9x, 1.2x
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • seqadmin
    Best Practices for Single-Cell Sequencing Analysis
    by seqadmin



    While isolating and preparing single cells for sequencing was historically the bottleneck, recent technological advancements have shifted the challenge to data analysis. This highlights the rapidly evolving nature of single-cell sequencing. The inherent complexity of single-cell analysis has intensified with the surge in data volume and the incorporation of diverse and more complex datasets. This article explores the challenges in analysis, examines common pitfalls, offers...
    06-06-2024, 07:15 AM
  • seqadmin
    Latest Developments in Precision Medicine
    by seqadmin



    Technological advances have led to drastic improvements in the field of precision medicine, enabling more personalized approaches to treatment. This article explores four leading groups that are overcoming many of the challenges of genomic profiling and precision medicine through their innovative platforms and technologies.

    Somatic Genomics
    “We have such a tremendous amount of genetic diversity that exists within each of us, and not just between us as individuals,”...
    05-24-2024, 01:16 PM

ad_right_rmr

Collapse

News

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by seqadmin, Yesterday, 07:49 AM
0 responses
12 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 06-20-2024, 07:23 AM
0 responses
14 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 06-17-2024, 06:54 AM
0 responses
16 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 06-14-2024, 07:24 AM
0 responses
25 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Working...
X