Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • yaximik
    Senior Member
    • Apr 2011
    • 199

    #1

    bacterial genome seq advice

    A question to gurus of bacterial genome sequencing. I have a customer that wants to re-sequence 24 different bacterial genomes. What would be a reasonable level of multiplexing on MiSeq assuming an average genome size of 5-6 Mb and optimal (from your experience) for resequencing coverage depth? Would a combination with GS Jr sequencing improve the fidelity of assembly and ref mapping?
  • microgirl123
    Senior Member
    • Jun 2012
    • 199

    #2
    Have you seen Illumina's coverage calculator?
    Calculator to help determine the reagents and sequencing runs needed to arrive at desired coverage for your experiment.

    People here like to aim for 25x coverage for a first try at de novo assembly; not sure about resequencing.

    Comment

    • barrmur
      Member
      • Nov 2009
      • 26

      #3
      Bear the following in mind however if you are performing a de novo on a miseq. Basespace/miseq reporter only samples 500Mb from each sample and tries to perform the assembly on this. If you have generated more than 500Mb for a sample you best bet is to assemble off line. The limit is due to the low processing power on the Miseq, de novos are pretty memory hungry.

      We have done some re sequencing on the miseq and 25 sample is reasonable on a 2 x 250bp. If you upload you genome you will get coverage stats and some nice graphs. The only thing to be careful with is equal representation with 25 samples.

      Comment

      • krobison
        Senior Member
        • Nov 2007
        • 734

        #4
        If you are going to suggest a second platform, PacBio is a far better choice than GS Jr. With an RS II instrument and a good library prep, 1-2 SMRT cells would probably be sufficient to assemble these genomes without the Illumina data.

        The difference between 2x250 data and 454 Jr data isn't going to very great; only a small number of gaps will be patched by 454. In contrast, a good SMRT library is going to give you many 5Kb+ reads which are likely to span most repeats in a bacterial genome.

        Cost-wise, I believe 454 Jr will be much more expensive than PacBio; many core facilities will make a library and run 2 SMRT cells for ~$1K. 1 SMRT cell would probably be sufficient if the data is to be combined with Illumina data (using PacBioToCA or similar pipeline).

        Cost all four approaches out (Illumina only, PacBio only, Illumina+454 Jr, Illumina+PacBio), and keep in mind that the PacBio options have a much better shot of getting to 1 contig per DNA replicon.

        Comment

        • MadsAlbertsen
          Member
          • Aug 2010
          • 26

          #5
          If you want closed genomes de novo you could also just use the Illumina Nextera Mate-pair protocol. In our experience it works great and usually results in a single chromosome.

          However, the mate-pair protocol is more expensive and time consuming compared to the normal nextera-PE protocols.

          For coverage calculations you will need to know the average GC content of the genome in question. While 25x coverage might be OK for a 50% GC genome. It will be too little for a 65%+ GC genome.

          rgds
          Mads

          Comment

          Latest Articles

          Collapse

          • SEQadmin2
            16S/ITS Profiling vs. Shotgun Metagenomics: What Changes in Your Workflow?
            by SEQadmin2




            NGS has revolutionized clinical microbiology by offering new ways to identify and surveil pathogens without prior knowledge of the target. One popular approach is 16S rRNA and ITS amplicon sequencing, which targets specific microbial markers. But studies are increasingly incorporating shotgun metagenomics, a technique that sequences all DNA from a sample without targeting specific microbial markers. This approach allows more detailed taxonomic classification, detection...
            Today, 06:46 AM
          • SEQadmin2
            Multiomic Liquid Biopsy: What DNA/RNA Panels Reveal That DNA Alone Can’t
            by SEQadmin2



            Tumors contain complex mixtures of cell populations that evolve in response to treatment and host-specific factors. Tissue biopsies provide only static snapshots of a tumor’s state. But what if we could follow that evolution over time using a minimally invasive technique?

            Liquid biopsies can detect tumor-derived material circulating in the bloodstream, providing a way to study treatment response, detect emerging resistance, and discover new biomarkers. Circulating
            ...
            10-14-2026, 09:55 AM

          ad_right_rmr

          Collapse

          News

          Collapse

          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by SEQadmin2, 10-28-2026, 09:57 AM
          0 responses
          22 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 10-28-2026, 09:51 AM
          0 responses
          14 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 11:13 AM
          0 responses
          68 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 10:48 AM
          0 responses
          48 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Working...