Deep sequencing analysis

HA H. H. Abdul-Razak
CR C. J. Rocca
SH S. J. Howe
MA M. E. Alonso-Ferrero
JW J. Wang
RG R. Gabriel
CB C. C. Bartholomae
CG C. H. V. Gan
MG M. I. Garín
AR A. Roberts
MB M. P. Blundell
VP V. Prakash
FM F. J. Molina-Estevez
JP J. Pantoglou
GG G. Guenechea
MH M. C. Holmes
PG P. D. Gregory
CK C. Kinnon
CK C. von Kalle
MS M. Schmidt
JB J. A. Bueren
AT A. J. Thrasher
RY R. J. Yáñez-Muñoz
request Request a Protocol
ask Ask a question
Favorite

Deep sequencing was performed using the MiSeq system (Illumina, San Diego CA). Specific primer pairs (Supplementary Table 3) were designed, each amplifying 100–200 bp fragments spanning the target site or one of the predicted top 10 putative off-target sites (Supplementary Table 3), and each incorporating adaptor sequences for the MiSeq processing. Briefly, genomic DNA samples were initially amplified using primers listed in Supplementary Table 3, then a nested adaptor PCR was run using the primers listed in the footnote to Supplementary Table 3. Following amplifications, PCR products were barcoded by running a 14-cycle barcode PCR. The barcoded PCR products were purified using a PCR purification kit (Qiagen), pooled and sequenced using the Illumina MiSeq platform. A custom-written computer script was used to extract “high-quality sequence reads”, based on their alignment with the wild-type template sequence. Sequences that contained a deletion or insertion resulting in shorter or longer amplicons which involve any base in the ZFN cleavage site were classified as an NHEJ-mediated deletion or insertion, respectively; together, such mutations are classified as “indels”. Sequences with the expected changes (3 substitutions, 1 to wild-type and 2 for novel BsaWI site (Fig. 1a) were classified as “corrected”.

Do you have any questions about this protocol?

Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.

post Post a Question
0 Q&A