Section of Forensic Genetics, Department of Forensic Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Section of Forensic Genetics, Department of Forensic Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2021 Jan;50:102411. doi: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2020.102411. Epub 2020 Nov 2.
A custom GeneRead DNAseq SNP panel with 210 markers was evaluated using the Ion S5 and MiSeq sequencing platforms. Sensitivity, PCR cycle number, and the use of half volume of reagents for target enrichment and library preparation were tested. Furthermore, genotype concordance between results obtained with the different sequencing platforms and with known profiles generated using other sequencing assays was analysed. The GeneRead DNASeq SNP assay gave reproducible results with an input of 200 pg DNA on both platforms. A total of 204 loci were successfully sequenced. Three loci failed completely in the PCR amplification, and three additional loci displayed frequent locus drop-outs due to low read depth or high heterozygote imbalance. Overall, the read depth across the loci was more well-balanced with the MiSeq, while the heterozygote balance was less variable with the Ion S5. Noise levels were low on both platforms (median< 0.2 %). Two simple criteria for genotyping were applied: A minimum threshold of 45 reads and an acceptable heterozygote balance range of 0.3-3.0. Complete concordance between platforms was observed except for three genotypes in one of the poorly performing loci, rs1470637. This locus had relatively low read depths on both platforms, skewed heterozygote balance, and frequent locus drop-outs. There was also full genotype concordance between the results from the GeneRead assay and known profiles generated with the QIAseq and Ion AmpliSeq assays. The few discordant results were either due to locus drop-outs in the poorly performing loci or allele drop-outs in the QIAseq assay. Profiles with a minimum of 179 SNPs were obtained from four challenging case work samples (blood swabs, bone, or blood from a corpse). Overall, the GeneRead DNASeq assay showed considerable potential and could provide a reliable method for SNP genotyping in cases involving identification of individuals, prediction of phenotypic traits, and ancestry inference.
采用 Ion S5 和 MiSeq 测序平台对带有 210 个标记的定制 GeneRead DNAseq SNP 基因分型 panel 进行了评估。对灵敏度、PCR 循环数以及目标富集和文库制备中半体积试剂的使用进行了测试。此外,还分析了不同测序平台获得的结果与使用其他测序方法生成的已知图谱之间的基因型一致性。在两种平台上,当输入量为 200pg DNA 时,GeneRead DNAseq SNP 检测均能得到可重复的结果。总共成功测序了 204 个位点。有 3 个位点的 PCR 扩增完全失败,另外 3 个位点由于读取深度低或高度杂合性失衡,出现频繁的位点缺失。总的来说,MiSeq 测序时各位点的读取深度更加均衡,而 Ion S5 测序时杂合性平衡的变化更小。两种平台的噪声水平均较低(中位数<0.2%)。应用了两个简单的基因分型标准:最小读取阈值为 45 个和可接受的杂合性平衡范围为 0.3-3.0。除了在一个性能较差的位点(rs1470637)中观察到三个基因型不一致外,两种平台之间观察到完全一致。该位点在两种平台上的读取深度均相对较低,杂合性平衡偏斜,且频繁出现位点缺失。GeneRead 检测结果与使用 QIAseq 和 Ion AmpliSeq 检测方法生成的已知图谱之间也完全一致。少数不一致的结果要么是由于性能较差的位点的缺失,要么是 QIAseq 检测方法中的等位基因缺失。从四个具有挑战性的案例样本(血斑、骨头或尸体血液)中获得了具有至少 179 个 SNP 的图谱。总的来说,GeneRead DNAseq 检测具有相当大的潜力,可以为涉及个体识别、表型特征预测和祖先推断的 SNP 基因分型提供可靠的方法。