Anyone tried the Rapid Run v2 reagents?

[bilyl]

Has anyone tried out the new HiSeq Rapid Run v2 reagents? They are compatible with 500 cycle runs but are also offered in 50 and 200 cycle.

The user manual says the supported cluster density is higher, and it includes an extra "cleavage wash buffer". Also apparently it requires a HiSeq software update.

I'm curious as to whether this yields an improvement in quality, as I think there is not much (or if any) price difference with v1 reagents. Anyone have any experience so far?

[matth431]

Has anyone tried out the new HiSeq Rapid Run v2 reagents? They are compatible with 500 cycle runs but are also offered in 50 and 200 cycle.

The user manual says the supported cluster density is higher, and it includes an extra "cleavage wash buffer". Also apparently it requires a HiSeq software update.

I'm curious as to whether this yields an improvement in quality, as I think there is not much (or if any) price difference with v1 reagents. Anyone have any experience so far?

Yes, would be keen to know this. I'm also disappointed Illumina haven't taken the opportunity to introduce 300-cycle kits as we have a lot of users who want 2x151 to help with polyploid read mappings but wouldn't spring for 2x251 runs - pooling the 200 and 50 kits is a pain!

We're being upgraded to the v4 chemistry this week which will involve the software update, so I may order one to try out.

[weigrc]

We were going to try RR V2 reagents, but paused the move after we knew it needs to have a software update + maintenance wash chemical changed first...

[EvelyneLuyten]

Does anyone have specs of these v2 Rapid reagents vs. v1 Rapid reagents?
Can't find them online...

[weigrc]

Info can be found as below. Briefly, V2 generates the same sequencing output and quality as V1 does, but V2 can have PE250 run.

https://my.illumina.com/MyIllumina/Bulletin/Li1FV1fh7kiv3_J5Rg8bAg/introduction-to-hiseq-rapid-v2-chemistry-and-hcs-2

[EvelyneLuyten]

Thanks

Thanks a lot!

[SNPsaurus]

I just looked at a 150 run with v2 and it was quality "I" all the way to the end. Don't know what the error rate looked like from empirical determination, but the fastq file looked very nice!