外显子组捕获试剂盒的比较

04/21/2022 23:50 • 生物技术 • 阅读 209

Comparison of exome capture kits

	Agilent HaloPlex Exome	Agilent SureSelect All Exon V5.0	NimbleGen SeqCap EZ Human Exome V3.0	Illumina Nextera Rapid Capture Expanded Exome	Illumina TruSeq Exome Enrichment
Target size	37 MB	50 MB	64 MB	62 MB	64 MB
Probe size (bases)	161 ± 75	120	55–105	95	95
Number of probes	2.49 million	789 000	2.1 million	347 517	340 427
Number of targeted exons	557 999	335 765	∼300 000	201 121	201 121
Reads on target (%)	∼80	∼80	>70	∼60	>65
(%) target bases covered at ≥10x	>90	>90	>95	>97	>97
Recommended DNA input	200 ng	3 mg	3 mg	50 ng	500 ng
Fragmentation method	Transposomes	Ultrasonication	Ultrasonication	Transposomes	Ultrasonication
Strengths	Smallest amounts of DNA required	Fewer duplicated reads	More uniform coverage	Best coverage of UTRs and micro RNAs	Best coverage of UTRs and micro RNAs
		Better sensitivity for indels	Most reads on target	Fast
		High alignment rate
Weaknesses	Variable length target regions	Most affected by high GC content	Alignment rate less than Agilent	High proportion of off target reads	High proportion of off-target reads
		Variable length target regions		Coverage bias in GC-rich regions	Variable length target regions
		Fewer reads on target compared with NimbleGen			Poorest for reads on target

Note . A tabulated comparison of Agilent’s SureSelect and Haloplex capture kits, Illumina’s Nextera and TruSeq kits and NimbleGen’s SeqCap kit.

UTR = untranslated region

如若转载，请注明出处：https://www.ouq.net/1677.html