Department Medical Genetics, Oslo University Hospital and University of Oslo, Kirkeveien 166, 0450, Oslo, Norway.
BMC Genomics. 2022 Feb 1;23(1):92. doi: 10.1186/s12864-022-08316-y.
Novel commercial kits for whole genome library preparation for next-generation sequencing on Illumina platforms promise shorter workflows, lower inputs and cost savings. Time savings are achieved by employing enzymatic DNA fragmentation and by combining end-repair and tailing reactions. Fewer cleanup steps also allow greater DNA input flexibility (1 ng-1 μg), PCR-free options from 100 ng DNA, and lower price as compared to the well-established sonication and tagmentation-based DNA library preparation kits.
We compared the performance of four enzymatic fragmentation-based DNA library preparation kits (from New England Biolabs, Roche, Swift Biosciences and Quantabio) to a tagmentation-based kit (Illumina) using low input DNA amounts (10 ng) and PCR-free reactions with 100 ng DNA. With four technical replicates of each input amount and kit, we compared the kits' fragmentation sequence-bias as well as performance parameters such as sequence coverage and the clinically relevant detection of single nucleotide and indel variants. While all kits produced high quality sequence data and demonstrated similar performance, several enzymatic fragmentation methods produced library insert sizes which deviated from those intended. Libraries with longer insert lengths performed better in terms of coverage, SNV and indel detection. Lower performance of shorter-insert libraries could be explained by loss of sequence coverage to overlapping paired-end reads, exacerbated by the preferential sequencing of shorter fragments on Illumina sequencers. We also observed that libraries prepared with minimal or no PCR performed best with regard to indel detection.
The enzymatic fragmentation-based DNA library preparation kits from NEB, Roche, Swift and Quantabio are good alternatives to the tagmentation based Nextera DNA flex kit from Illumina, offering reproducible results using flexible DNA inputs, quick workflows and lower prices. Libraries with insert DNA fragments longer than the cumulative sum of both read lengths avoid read overlap, thus produce more informative data that leads to strongly improved genome coverage and consequently also increased sensitivity and precision of SNP and indel detection. In order to best utilize such enzymatic fragmentation reagents, researchers should be prepared to invest time to optimize fragmentation conditions for their particular samples.
新型商业化试剂盒可用于在 Illumina 平台上进行下一代测序的全基因组文库制备,其具有流程更短、输入量更低和成本节约等优点。通过采用酶促 DNA 片段化和末端修复和加尾反应的组合,可以实现时间节省。较少的清洗步骤还允许更大的 DNA 输入灵活性(1ng-1μg),从 100ng DNA 开始,无 PCR 选项,与成熟的基于超声和标签化的 DNA 文库制备试剂盒相比,价格更低。
我们使用低输入 DNA 量(10ng)和无 PCR 反应(100ng DNA),将四种基于酶促片段化的 DNA 文库制备试剂盒(来自 New England Biolabs、Roche、Swift Biosciences 和 Quantabio)与基于标签化的试剂盒(Illumina)进行比较。对于每种输入量和试剂盒,我们进行了四个技术重复,比较了试剂盒的片段化序列偏差以及性能参数,如序列覆盖度和临床相关的单核苷酸和插入缺失变体的检测。虽然所有试剂盒都产生了高质量的序列数据,并表现出相似的性能,但几种酶促片段化方法产生的文库插入长度与预期的不同。具有较长插入长度的文库在覆盖度、SNV 和 indel 检测方面表现更好。较短插入长度文库性能较低的原因可能是重叠的配对末端读取导致的序列覆盖度丢失,Illumina 测序仪优先测序较短片段加剧了这种情况。我们还观察到,最小化或无 PCR 制备的文库在 indel 检测方面表现最佳。
来自 NEB、Roche、Swift 和 Quantabio 的基于酶促片段化的 DNA 文库制备试剂盒是 Illumina 的基于标签化的 Nextera DNA flex 试剂盒的良好替代品,它们提供了使用灵活的 DNA 输入、快速工作流程和更低价格的可重复结果。具有长于两个读长总和的插入 DNA 片段的文库避免了读取重叠,从而产生更具信息量的数据,从而大大提高基因组覆盖度,进而提高 SNP 和 indel 检测的灵敏度和精度。为了最佳利用这些酶促片段化试剂,研究人员应该准备好投入时间来优化其特定样本的片段化条件。