Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

0 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Comparison of seven single cell Whole Genome Amplification commercial kits using targeted sequencing

ABSTRACT: Comparison of seven single cell Whole Genome Amplification commercial kits using targeted sequencing

PROVIDER: PRJEB22132 | ENA |

REPOSITORIES: ENA

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Dataset's files

Source:

			Action	DRS
	ERR2093980_1.fastq.gz	Fastqsanger.gz
	ERR2093980_2.fastq.gz	Fastqsanger.gz
	ERR2093990_1.fastq.gz	Fastqsanger.gz
	ERR2093990_2.fastq.gz	Fastqsanger.gz
	ERR2094000_1.fastq.gz	Fastqsanger.gz

Items per page:

1 - 5 of 380

Similar Datasets

Comparison of seven single cell Whole Genome Amplification commercial kits using targeted sequencing

Project description:Advances in biochemical technologies have led to a boost in the field of single cell genomics. Observation of the genome at a single cell resolution is currently achieved by pre-amplification using whole genome amplification (WGA) techniques that differ by their biochemical aspects and as a result by biased amplification of the original molecule. Several comparisons between commercially available single cell dedicated WGA kits (scWGA) were performed, however, these comparisons are costly, were only performed on selected scWGA kit and more notably, are limited by the number of analyzed cells, making them limited for reproducibility analysis. We benchmarked an economical assay to compare all commercially available scWGA kits that is based on targeted sequencing of thousands of genomic regions, including highly mutable genomic regions (microsatellites), from a large cohort of human single cells (125 cells in total). Using this approach, we could analyze the genome coverage, the reproducibility of genome coverage and the error rate of each kit. Our experimental design provides an affordable and reliable comparative assay that simulates a real single cell experiment. Results demonstrate the need for a dedicated kit selection depending on the desired single cell assay.

2017-09-24 | E-MTAB-5968 | biostudies-arrayexpress

Comparison of seven single cell whole genome amplification commercial kits using targeted sequencing.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC8387353 | biostudies-literature

A side-by-side comparison of commercial CUT&RUN kits

Project description:A side-by-side comparison of commercial CUT&RUN kits

| PRJNA1309578 | ENA

A side-by-side comparison of commercial CUT&RUN kits [Cut&Run]

Project description:A side-by-side comparison of commercial CUT&RUN kits [Cut&Run]

| PRJNA1309724 | ENA

A side-by-side comparison of commercial CUT&RUN kits

2026-05-15 | GSE306141 | GEO

Comparison of seven commercial RT-PCR diagnostic kits for COVID-19.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC7206434 | biostudies-literature

Comparision of different commercial library preparation kits for soil metagenomics studies

Project description:Comparision of different commercial library preparations kits for soil metagenomics studies

| PRJEB50284 | ENA

Systematic assessment of commercially available low-input miRNA library preparation kits

Project description:We compared the performance of six commercial kits (QIAseq, SMARTer, CATS, CleanTag, srLp, TailorMix) capable of handling <100ng total RNA input for miRNA detection sensitivity, reliability, titration response and ability to detect differentially expressed miRNAs at different amounts of synthetic miRNAs. We observed differences in detection sensitivity between the kits, but none were able to detect the full repertoire of expected miRNAs. The reliability within the replicates of all kits was good, while larger differences were observed between the kits, although none could accurately quantify the majority of miRNAs.

2019-09-27 | GSE133719 | GEO

An extension to: Systematic assessment of commercially available low-input miRNA library preparation kits

Project description:We compared the performance of two commercial kits (NEBNext and NEXTflex) for miRNA detection sensitivity, reliability, titration response and ability to detect differentially expressed miRNAs at different amounts of synthetic miRNAs. We observed differences in detection sensitivity between the kits, but none were able to detect the full repertoire of expected miRNAs. The reliability within the replicates of all kits was good, while larger differences were observed between the kits, although none could accurately quantify the majority of miRNAs. In a previous publication (https://doi.org/10.1080/15476286.2019.1667741; GEO accession number GSE133719) we accessed the performance of six additional miRNA library preparation kits.

2020-05-31 | GSE141658 | GEO

A side-by-side comparison of commercial CUT&RUN kits [Cut&Run]

Project description:Introduction: CUT&RUN (Cleavage Under Targets and Release Using Nuclease) followed by next-generation sequencing is a powerful method increasingly used in place of ChIP-seq to profile genome-wide protein-DNA interactions including those of transcription factors, histone modifications and chromatin remodelers. Although the choice of antibody is well known to affect data quality, we found that enrichment chemistry and protocol significantly affect data quality as well. Methods: In this study, we evaluated the performance of three commercially available CUT&RUN kits (Active Motif - ChIC/CUT&RUN Assay Kit, Cell Signaling Technology (CST) – CUT&RUN Assay Kit, EpiCypher - CUTANA™ ChIC/CUT&RUN Kit) on two target histone marks to represent sharp peaks (H3K4me3) and broad domains (H3K27me3). We compared data quality from libraries generated with fresh and frozen cells as well as with cell numbers that represent the low and high ends of the recommended input. Results and Discussion: Our results show that all three chemistries generate high-quality libraries. Our data revealed that despite generating libraries with fewer H3K4me3 peaks than the EpiCypher and Active Motif workflows did, the CST protocol generated libraries with superior signal and higher accuracy. Compared with the H3K4me3 libraries, the H3K27me3 libraries presented a lower percentage of shared peaks across all libraries and lower reproducibility between technical replicates. Compared with the CST protocol, the Active Motif and EpiCypher protocols generated H3K27me3 libraries with higher peak numbers, and the EpiCypher chemistry scored highest in accuracy. Libraries from cryopreserved cells generated data of similar quality as libraries from fresh cells; libraries generated with 100,000 cells had higher concordance between technical replicates than did libraries made with 500,000 cells.

2026-05-15 | GSE306233 | GEO

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data