thank you for your reply.
yes, I tried different amount of MspI and I think that 100U/ug is the threshold. After that the graph at the Bioanalyzer looks like if there is unspecific cutting (the microsatellite peaks, as predicted by in silico digestion, disappear).
I wanted to try to do phe/chl purification - size selection on agarose gel - gel extraction with ethanol precip because of the huge losses of DNA. I thought that doing size selection AND cleaning up with AMPure beads would solve the problem, but what I get it's not a purification, rather an enrichment.
Unfortunately we can't use Illumina. Our institute got 10 Solid machines from Life Tech...no other choice but Solid!
-
Hi Simone,
I use MspI quite a bit, 200 - 300 U sounds excessive. Try Phenol/Chloroform/Isoamyl alcohol treating your DNA to make sure it is clean. You could also try a commercial (or some plasmid) DNA to see if the enzyme is OK.
Also, are you aware of the bioinformatics issues in working with bisulphite in colorspace? Horrible. I've had to deal with it the past year. If you have a choice then definately use Illumina sequencing.Leave a comment:
-
Does anybody have experience with the RRBS protocol?
Dear all,
we want to do methylome sequencing after enrichment using Solid4.
Our approach is based on the RRBS paper(s) (Meissner et al., Nature, 2008; Smith et al., Methods 2009 and Gu et al., Nat. Methods, 2010) with some modifications.
I encountered HUGE problems so far, starting from step 1! Here are just 2:
- in the original paper they used 40 (and later 20) units of MspI to cut the gDNA, starting from as little as 1 ug (later just 300 ng). When I did the same I saw (Bioanalyzer) that the overwhelming majority of the DNA is still uncut. Only when I increase the amount of MspI to 200-300U (!!!) short fragments appear...probably generated by star activity (?)
- we decided to perform size selection with dSPRI using AMPure beads but I found that the yield is not 90-95% as declared on the BC's website but as low as 10-15%. Furthermore, the range appears to be poorly reproducible (and I want to select the range 100-300 bp) and after the second SPRI I still see long fragments that should have been removed after the first SPRI...but I guess they come from using 2 ug gDNA and 40 ul beads. According to Lundin et al. (PlosOne, 2010) it seems that 10 ul of beads can bind 0.5 ug DNA. I'm now trying with less DNA.
It would be nice if anyone out there has some comments/suggestions!
Thanx a lot!
-
Genomics studies in neuroscience face a special challenge due to the brain’s complexity and scarcity of samples. Mapping changes in cell type and state using conventional next-generation sequencing methods remains challenging. Advances in technologies like single-cell sequencing, spatial transcriptomics, and long-read sequencing have opened the door to deeper studies of the brain and diseases like Alzheimer’s, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and schizophrenia.
...07-09-2026, 11:10 AM -
Cancer survival rates have significantly increased in the last few decades in the United States, reaching a combined 70% 5-year survival rate by 2021. Behind this number, there are years of research to find new therapies, drug targets, and early detection methods. But there is one core challenge that keeps slowing down these advances, and it’s about drug resistance.
There is no single reason why many patients don’t respond to treatment as expected. Cancer is...07-08-2026, 05:17 AM -
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
Leave a comment: