Cargando…
Systematic Comparison of Three Methods for Fragmentation of Long-Range PCR Products for Next Generation Sequencing
Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technologies are gaining importance in the routine clinical diagnostic setting. It is thus desirable to simplify the workflow for high-throughput diagnostics. Fragmentation of DNA is a crucial step for preparation of template libraries and various methods are current...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3227650/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22140562 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028240 |
_version_ | 1782217776235020288 |
---|---|
author | Knierim, Ellen Lucke, Barbara Schwarz, Jana Marie Schuelke, Markus Seelow, Dominik |
author_facet | Knierim, Ellen Lucke, Barbara Schwarz, Jana Marie Schuelke, Markus Seelow, Dominik |
author_sort | Knierim, Ellen |
collection | PubMed |
description | Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technologies are gaining importance in the routine clinical diagnostic setting. It is thus desirable to simplify the workflow for high-throughput diagnostics. Fragmentation of DNA is a crucial step for preparation of template libraries and various methods are currently known. Here we evaluated the performance of nebulization, sonication and random enzymatic digestion of long-range PCR products on the results of NGS. All three methods produced high-quality sequencing libraries for the 454 platform. However, if long-range PCR products of different length were pooled equimolarly, sequence coverage drastically dropped for fragments below 3,000 bp. All three methods performed equally well with regard to overall sequence quality (PHRED) and read length. Enzymatic fragmentation showed highest consistency between three library preparations but performed slightly worse than sonication and nebulization with regard to insertions/deletions in the raw sequence reads. After filtering for homopolymer errors, enzymatic fragmentation performed best if compared to the results of classic Sanger sequencing. As the overall performance of all three methods was equal with only minor differences, a fragmentation method can be chosen solely according to lab facilities, feasibility and experimental design. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3227650 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-32276502011-12-02 Systematic Comparison of Three Methods for Fragmentation of Long-Range PCR Products for Next Generation Sequencing Knierim, Ellen Lucke, Barbara Schwarz, Jana Marie Schuelke, Markus Seelow, Dominik PLoS One Research Article Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technologies are gaining importance in the routine clinical diagnostic setting. It is thus desirable to simplify the workflow for high-throughput diagnostics. Fragmentation of DNA is a crucial step for preparation of template libraries and various methods are currently known. Here we evaluated the performance of nebulization, sonication and random enzymatic digestion of long-range PCR products on the results of NGS. All three methods produced high-quality sequencing libraries for the 454 platform. However, if long-range PCR products of different length were pooled equimolarly, sequence coverage drastically dropped for fragments below 3,000 bp. All three methods performed equally well with regard to overall sequence quality (PHRED) and read length. Enzymatic fragmentation showed highest consistency between three library preparations but performed slightly worse than sonication and nebulization with regard to insertions/deletions in the raw sequence reads. After filtering for homopolymer errors, enzymatic fragmentation performed best if compared to the results of classic Sanger sequencing. As the overall performance of all three methods was equal with only minor differences, a fragmentation method can be chosen solely according to lab facilities, feasibility and experimental design. Public Library of Science 2011-11-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3227650/ /pubmed/22140562 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028240 Text en Knierim et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Knierim, Ellen Lucke, Barbara Schwarz, Jana Marie Schuelke, Markus Seelow, Dominik Systematic Comparison of Three Methods for Fragmentation of Long-Range PCR Products for Next Generation Sequencing |
title | Systematic Comparison of Three Methods for Fragmentation of Long-Range PCR Products for Next Generation Sequencing |
title_full | Systematic Comparison of Three Methods for Fragmentation of Long-Range PCR Products for Next Generation Sequencing |
title_fullStr | Systematic Comparison of Three Methods for Fragmentation of Long-Range PCR Products for Next Generation Sequencing |
title_full_unstemmed | Systematic Comparison of Three Methods for Fragmentation of Long-Range PCR Products for Next Generation Sequencing |
title_short | Systematic Comparison of Three Methods for Fragmentation of Long-Range PCR Products for Next Generation Sequencing |
title_sort | systematic comparison of three methods for fragmentation of long-range pcr products for next generation sequencing |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3227650/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22140562 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028240 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT knierimellen systematiccomparisonofthreemethodsforfragmentationoflongrangepcrproductsfornextgenerationsequencing AT luckebarbara systematiccomparisonofthreemethodsforfragmentationoflongrangepcrproductsfornextgenerationsequencing AT schwarzjanamarie systematiccomparisonofthreemethodsforfragmentationoflongrangepcrproductsfornextgenerationsequencing AT schuelkemarkus systematiccomparisonofthreemethodsforfragmentationoflongrangepcrproductsfornextgenerationsequencing AT seelowdominik systematiccomparisonofthreemethodsforfragmentationoflongrangepcrproductsfornextgenerationsequencing |