[Biotech Rockstar]

QuantuMDx (www.quantumdx.com) - Nanowire sequencing.

[krobison]

This thread is about extant sequencing providers; the graphene nanopores are an interesting research effort but have yet to collect actual sequence data.

[strob]

another player (nanopore sequencing) (Kavli Institute of Nanoscience, The Netherlands)

Graphene Nanopores Solve DNA Sequencing Problem

http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/25252/

The paper

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1005/1005.4754.pdf

[KevinLam]

I hate to duplicate other's efforts
but Albert's nice work on the spreadsheet is a little too large to use for a presentation.
and I can't verify some of the numbers. and it gets confusing when SOLiD uses 'mappable' data output and Illumina doesn't mention anything.
So I have done one on my own

I have posted my version here

based on what's on the Big 3 's website and their specs.

Do drop a comment if i got anything wrong.

[msincan]

here is a nice evolving GDocs spreadsheet if you did not know.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AvaxS3m5rl-9dHdtUGRtaGlsZWNFNWJleDRXaUhQTHc&hl=en

[krobison]

Look at this thread for service providers http://seqanswers.com/forums/showthr...p?t=948&page=4

[cdragon]

A nice list!

Are there any information about whether each company provides commercial sequencing services?

[brjordan]

Congratulations to Strob for this very useful list and for the working links. This is very helpful and informative, good work!

[ECO]

Good suggestions all. I'll keep an eye out for too much discussion about any single vendor overwhelming this forum, or for new instrument releases. Thanks.

[drio]

What about querying the database to see the number threads per technology. If > X we create a forum.

Opening them by user/vendor request sounds fine to me too.

[bioinfosm]

I am in favor of adding them by request (by users or vendors). It looks like there are a lot of companies/technologies and it would get cluttered quickly if a forum existed for each one before there are users/vendors who would post to the site.

I agree. Thats a good balance to avoid clutter, and at the same time remain open for the new ones..

[strob]

I updated and modified the list

Many thanks for all the input!!!

[nilshomer]

One vote for, one vote against. Need more input.

I think it would be a good opportunity to clearly lay out the technical summaries of each company...like I did so long ago on the Next Gen Summaries page.

I am in favor of adding them by request (by users or vendors). It looks like there are a lot of companies/technologies and it would get cluttered quickly if a forum existed for each one before there are users/vendors who would post to the site.

[ECO]

@ECO: yes, why not have the Pipeline for "those that either have a commercially released instrument, or are well on their way". I guess you can be the judge, and we'll protest if we don't agree a certain system falls under the definition :-)

I would wait and see what's the number of questions each new platform gets. As soon as we see some traffic then you can create specific Forums.

One vote for, one vote against. Need more input.

I think it would be a good opportunity to clearly lay out the technical summaries of each company...like I did so long ago on the Next Gen Summaries page.

[drio]

What do you all think, is it time to expand "The Pipeline" forum into more companies (the list above being a great start)?

My rule was previously that you had to have a commercially released instrument, but I think there is definitely room for more discussion that one forum allows.

Thoughts?

I would wait and see what's the number of questions each new platform gets. As soon as we see some traffic then you can create specific Forums.