Hi,
I've read several threads with very related topics, but none have addressed the one simple question I have (which stems from my being new to this).
We already have an assembled transcriptome (from 454 data), and would now like to do an experiment to assess differential gene expression with Illumina.
My question is (assume one Illumina lane is being sequenced): will a 2 x 100 bp paired-end lane generate approximately HALF the number of reads of a 1 x 100 bp single end lane? (By read I mean a copy of a transcript, i.e. the two ends of a paired-end sequence count as only ONE read, for my purposes)
I would assume so, since the sequencing effort (in terms of base pairs) for such a paired-end is twice that of the single end.
Since I'm interested only in maximizing read counts, the extra information that comes in the paired-end sequence is not of interest to me at this point.
Any insight regarding the comparison of read counts per sequencing effort between the two methods would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
I've read several threads with very related topics, but none have addressed the one simple question I have (which stems from my being new to this).
We already have an assembled transcriptome (from 454 data), and would now like to do an experiment to assess differential gene expression with Illumina.
My question is (assume one Illumina lane is being sequenced): will a 2 x 100 bp paired-end lane generate approximately HALF the number of reads of a 1 x 100 bp single end lane? (By read I mean a copy of a transcript, i.e. the two ends of a paired-end sequence count as only ONE read, for my purposes)
I would assume so, since the sequencing effort (in terms of base pairs) for such a paired-end is twice that of the single end.
Since I'm interested only in maximizing read counts, the extra information that comes in the paired-end sequence is not of interest to me at this point.
Any insight regarding the comparison of read counts per sequencing effort between the two methods would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
Comment