Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Iikki
    Junior Member
    • Sep 2015
    • 3

    Sample pooling, do FFPE derived samples need to be separate from blood derived?

    Hi!

    We sequence both blood/fresh frozen and FFPE derived exomes using the Illumina HiSeq2000 and HiSeq4000. After the sample prep the samples are pooled. We have always pooled FFPE derived samples separate from blood/FF derived, since FFPE samples tend to produce a bit less data and we have been worried that the amount of data from these samples would be further reduced when competing with better quality DNA. I have no idea why this would happen though. The molecules bind through their adapter sequences, which are the same and "fresh" regardless of tissue of origin, and the amount of input material on the flow cell is naturally the same. Does anyone have experience on running FFPE and blood/FF samples on the same lane or any idea why we should not do this?

    BR, Iikki
  • kerplunk412
    Senior Member
    • Jun 2012
    • 119

    #2
    As you noted, unless you are doing PCR-free library prep, the samples you put onto the sequencer are all fresh, high-quality PCR products and thus the type of starting material shouldn't really matter. That being said, shorter library molecules do form clusters more efficiently, so that should be taken into account when mixing.

    It makes sense to me that the FFPE samples would have lower mapping rates and more errors, so you may need to sequence them deeper to achieve the same data quality as the blood samples. However the actual clustering efficiency of the samples should not be any different, assuming PCR was used in the library preps.

    Comment

    • Iikki
      Junior Member
      • Sep 2015
      • 3

      #3
      Thank you kerplunk412!

      Comment

      Latest Articles

      Collapse

      • GATTACAT
        Reply to Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
        by GATTACAT
        Love this - good data definitely starts from good input, and poor input can only give relatively poor data. I particularly like the mention of Nanodrop/absorbance based methods for quantification. It's such a toss up if you'll get an accurate reading or what amounts to a randomly generated number, and a lot of library/sequencing related issues can be traced back to poor quant.
        07-01-2026, 11:43 AM
      • 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

      ad_right_rmr

      Collapse

      News

      Collapse

      Topics Statistics Last Post
      Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 11:08 AM
      0 responses
      6 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
      0 responses
      11 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
      0 responses
      19 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
      0 responses
      53 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Working...