Tweet
Hi! I am trying to find the fastest sequencing machine. How long does the sequencing take at minimum? Does the bridge amplification, sequencing, or data processing take most time? Why does the sequencing take time, if there is only 250 bases to sequence (as all reads are read simultaneously)? Thanks in advance for the comments!
-
-
Minimum run time on Illumina systems is 4 hours on MiniSeq and MiSeq for 36 cycles. Generally, sequencing takes long time. In every cycles depending on 1, 2 or 4 colour chemistry few steps is required which includes base incorporation, imaging, debolcking and washing. YouTube search should find videos on different Illumina chemistries. One colour chemistry have slightly different workflow. -
the fastest sequencing time for an average run is probably Oxford Nanopore or Ion Torrent. Both of those systems do not use optical detection or enzymatic steps to build the sequences. I suppose you could say PacBio is rather quick as well, though it does use optics.Originally posted by Kultamuna2 View PostLast edited by snetmcom; 03-07-2018, 10:27 PM.Comment
-
Thanks for the answers! Some additional questions woke in my mind when I read the answer. So at fastest sequencing takes 4 hours, does it include also the data processing (genome assembly)? Is it usually included in these given sequencing times? Is this 4 hours for a human genome?Originally posted by nucacidhunter View Post
I have also heard that read length affects the sequencing time: shorter the read length, faster the sequencing. Why isn't then all sequencing carried out with this 36bp read length? Do we get lower quality data with lower read length?Last edited by Kultamuna2; 03-12-2018, 03:38 PM.Comment
-
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
-
I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.
Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
Comment