注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

wangyufeng的博客

祝愿BB 健康开心快乐每一天

 
 
 

日志

 
 

Advantages & Disadvantages of NGS instrument  

2013-01-23 10:31:56|  分类: 生物信息分析 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |


Instrument Primary Advantages Primary Disadvantages
3730xl (capillary) Low cost for very small studies Very high cost for large amounts of data
454 GS Jr. Titanium Long read length; low capital cost; low cost per experiment High cost per Mb
454 FLX Titanium Long read length High cost per Mb
454 FLX+ Double the maximum read length of Titanium High capital cost; High cost per Mb; reagent issues; upgrade issues
PacBio Single molecule real-time sequencing; Longest available read length; Ability to detect base modifications; Short instrument run time; Random error profile; Modest cost per sample; Many methods being developed High error rates; Low total number of reads per run; High cost per Mb; High capital cost; Many methods still in development; Weak company performance
Ion Torrent – PGM Low cost instrument upgraded through disposable chips (the chip is the machine); very simple machine with few moving parts; clear trajectory to improved performance Higher error rate than Illumina; more hands-on time and fewer reads at higher cost per Mb relative to MiSeq
Ion Torrent – 314 chip Low cost per sample for small studies; Short time needed on instrument; Suitable for microbial sequencing and targeted sequencing High cost per Mb; Sample prep takes longer than time on the instrument; far fewer reads & slightly shorter total read length than MiSeq
Ion Torrent – 316 chip Same as 314, upgraded due to higher density chip; lower cost per read and Mb allows more applications Similar to 314, but more reads
Ion Torrent – 318 chip Same as 316, upgraded due to higher density chip; lower cost per read and Mb allows more applications Similar to 316, but more reads
Ion Torrent – Proton Moderately low-cost instrument for high throughput applications; similar cost to MiSeq, but PII and PIII chips will give more reads than MiSeq Higher error rate than Illumina; more hands-on time and shorter reads than MiSeq or HiSeq 2500 Rapid Run
Ion Torrent – Proton-I chip Similar to PGM chips, but with many more sensors (wells); more reads than MiSeq at similar cost/Mb; single contiguous read similar in length to HiSeq total length Higher cost/Mb than HiSeq; shorter reads than MiSeq; Higher error-rate than Illumina; more analysis tools needed
Ion Torrent – Proton-II chip Same as Proton-I chip, but with more sensors (wells); similar or possibly lower cost / Mb than HiSeq Same as Proton I but more reads & lower cost per Mb
Ion Torrent – Proton-III chip Same as Proton-II chip, but with more sensors (wells); similar or possibly lower cost / Mb than HiSeq Same as Proton II but more reads & lower cost per Mb
SOLiD – 5500xl Each lane of Flow-Chip can be run independently; High accuracy; Output in bases (not color-space); Ability to rescue failed sequencing cycles; 96 validated barcodes per lane; Throughput of 20-30Gb/day Longevity of Platform; Relatively short reads; more gaps in assemblies than Illumina data; less even data distribution than Illumina; High capital cost
Illumina MiSeq Moderate cost instrument and runs; Low cost per Mb for a small platform; Fastest Illumina run times and longest Illumina read lengths Relatively few reads and Higher cost per Mb compared to HiSeq
Illumina HiScanSQ Versatile instrument for full catalog of Illumina arrays and sequencing; Scalable in future Higher cost/Mb than HiSeq for large amounts of data
Illumina GAIIx Lower Capital Cost than HiSeqs Slightly higher cost per Mb than HiSeq; Not as scalable in the future
Illumina HiSeq 1000 Lower instrument cost than HiSeq 2000; same number of reads/lane and cost/lane as HiSeq 2000; field upgradable to HiSeq 2000; Future scalability Not as flexible as HiSeq 2000 due to having only 1 flow cell
Illumina HiSeq 2000 Same as HiSeq 1000, but runs 2 flow cells simultaneously; Most reads, Gb per day and Gb per run, lowest cost per Mb of all platforms* High capital cost; High computation needs
Illumina HiSeq 2500 Same as HiSeq 2000, but can also run two 2 lane miniFlowCells to achieve much faster run times and longer read lengths miniFlowCell will likely have a higher cost per read than standard HiSeq Flow Cell; can’t run miniFlowCell and standard Flow Cell at the same time
Oxford Nanopore minION * No Instrument; IT IS A USB DEVICE; can load “raw” samples Not yet available; No data publicly available; High cost per Mb relative to other Nanopore sequencers
Oxford Nanopore GridION 2000 * Extremely long reads are feasible; Low-cost instrument (node); Nodes can be placed in standard computer racks; Error-rate doesn’t increase along the length of the read; hairpin on one end allows reading of the complementary strand Not yet available; No data publicly available; 4% error-rates; errors are likely to be biased (thus multiple reads will lead to higher confidence in the wrong answer)
Oxford Nanopore GridION 8000 * Same as GridION 2000, but more reads per unit time; Lower cost per Gb Same as GridION 2000

Mb = Megabase; Gb = Gigabase; * Information based on company sources alone (independent data not yet available)


VIA:http://www.molecularecologist.com/next-gen-table-4-2013/

  评论这张
 
阅读(703)| 评论(0)
推荐 转载

历史上的今天

在LOFTER的更多文章

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2017