Tag Archives: M2

qPCR – Test Australian OsHV-1 ORF117 Primers

Using primers I previously designed, I tested them out for functionality (using the clone #1 plasmid prep DNA I made previously) and specificity (using the Australian, California, & French variants recently received)

Created a working 1:100 dilution of ALL DNA tested here.

All samples were run in duplicate.

Master mix calcs are here (Google Sheet): 20171221 – qPCR Austrailian OsHV-1 ORF117 Primer Test

Cycling params, plate layout, etc. can be viewed in the qPCR Report (see Results below).

qPCR Report (PDF): Sam_2017-12-21 15-09-49_CC009827.pdf
qPCR Data File (CFX): Sam_2017-12-21 15-09-49_CC009827.pcrd

Firstly, the primers work and generate a single melt curve peak (see melt curve plot below); so that proves functionality.

Results are interesting.

Australian samples (plasmid and DNA) amplify.

French samples (M1 & M2) do not amplify.

California samples: 3 of 4 samples amplify.

It’s possible that the California sample that did not amplify is due to too little DNA present in the 1:100 dilution I used (or, possibly no DNA is present at all). I have not quantified the DNA in these samples – went off assumption that the samples had previously been confirmed to have DNA in them by the source laboratories.

Regardless, the primers used here will amplify the French variant, but will amplify Australian and Californian variants.

See labeled amplification plots below.


Illumina Methylation Library Quantification – BS-seq Oly/C.gigas Libraries

Re-quantified the libraries that were completed yesterday using the Qubit3.0 dsDNA HS (high sensitivity) assay because the library concentrations were too low for the normal broad range kit.


Qubit Quants and Library Normalization Calcs: 20151222_qubit_illumina_methylation_libraries

1NF11 2.42
1NF15 1.88
1NF16 2.74
1NF17 2.54
2NF5 2.72
2NF6 2.44
2NF7 2.38
2NF8 1.88
M2 2.18
M3 2.56
NF2_6 2.5
NF_18 2.66


Things look pretty good. The TruSeq DNA Methylation Library Kit (Illumina) suggests that the libraries produced should end up with concentrations >3ng/μL, but we have plenty of DNA here to make a pool for running on the HiSeq2500.


Illumina Methylation Library Construction – Oly/C.gigas Bisulfite-treated DNA

Took the bisulfite-treated DNA from 20151218 and made Illumina libraries using the TruSeq DNA Methylation Library Kit (Illumina).

Quantified the completed libraries using the Qubit 3.0 dsDNA BR Kit (ThermoFisher).

Evaluated the DNA with the Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent) using the DNA 12000 assay. Illumina recommended using the High Sensitivity assay, but we don’t have access to that so I figured I’d just give the DNA 12000 assay a go.

SampleName IndexNumber BarCode



Library Quantification (Google Sheet): 20151221_quantification_illumina_methylation_libraries

Test Name Concentration (ng/μL)
1NF11 Out of range
1NF15 2.14
1NF16 2.74
1NF17 2.64
2NF5 2.92
2NF6 Out of range
2NF7 2.42
2NF8 2.56
M2 Out of range
M3 2.1
NF2_6 2.38
NF2_18 Out of range


I used the Qubit’s BR (broad range) kit because I wasn’t sure what concentrations to expect. I need to use the high sensitivity kit to get a better evaluation of all the samples’ concentrations.



Bioanalyzer Data File (Bioanalyzer 2100): 2100_20expert_DNA_2012000_DE72902486_2015-12-21_16-58-43.xad


Ha! Well, looks like you definitely need to use the DNA High Sensitivty assay for the Bioanalyzer to pick up anything. Although, I guess you can see a slight hump in most of the samples at the appropriate sizes (~300bp); you just have to squint. ;)


Bioanalyzer – Bisulfite-treated Oly/C.gigas DNA

Following the guidelines of the TruSeq DNA Methylation Library Prep Guide (Illumina), I ran 1μL of each sample on an RNA Pico 6000 chip on the Seeb Lab’s Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent) to confirm that bisulfite conversion from earlier today worked.


Data File 1(Bioanlyzer 2100): 2100 expert_Eukaryote Total RNA Pico_DE72902486_2015-12-18_21-05-04.xad

Data File 1(Bioanlyzer 2100): 2100 expert_Eukaryote Total RNA Pico_DE72902486_2015-12-18_21-42-55.xad



Firstly, the ladder failed to produce any peaks. Not sure why this happened. Possibly not denatured? Seems unlikely, but next time I run the Pico assay, I’ll denature the ladder aliquot I use prior to running.

Overall, the samples look as they should (see image from TruSeq DNA Methylation Kit manual below), albeit some are a bit lumpy.


Bisulfite Treatment – Oly Reciprocal Transplant DNA & C.gigas Lotterhos DNA for BS-seq

After confirming that the DNA available for this project looked good, I performed bisulfite treatment on the following gDNA samples:

  • 1NF11
  • 1NF15
  • 1NF16
  • 1NF17
  • 2NF5
  • 2NF6
  • 2NF7
  • 2NF8
  • NF2_6
  • NF2_18
  • M2
  • M3

Sample names breakdown like this:


1 = Fidalgo Bay outplants

NF = Fidalgo Bay broodstock origination

= Sample number


Same as above, but:

2 = Oyster Bay outplants

NF2_# (Oysters grown in Oyster Bay; DNA provided by Katherine Silliman)

NF2 = Fidalgo Bay broodstock origination, family #2

= Sample number

M2/M3 = C.gigas from Katie Lotterhos


Followed the guidelines of the TruSeq DNA Methylation Library Prep Guide (Illumina).

Used the EZ DNA Methylation-Gold Kit (ZymoResearch) according to the manufacturer’s protocol with the following changes/notes:

  • Used 100ng DNA (per Illumina recs; Zymo recommends at least 200ng for “optimal results”).
  • Thermal cycling was performed in 0.5mL thin-wall tubes in a PTC-200 (MJ Research) using a heated lid
  • Centrifugations were performed at 13,000g
  • Desulphonation incubation for 20mins.

DNA quantity calculations are here (Google Sheet): 20151218_oly_bisulfite_calcs

Samples were stored @ -20C. Will check samples via Bioanalyzer before proceeding to library construction.


Agarose Gel – Oly gDNA for BS-seq Libraries, Take Two

The gel I ran earlier today looked real rough, due to the fact that I didn’t bother to equalize loading quantities of samples (I just loaded 1μL of all samples regardless of concentration). So, I’m repeating it using 100ng of DNA from all samples.

Additionally, this gel also includes C.gigas samples that Katie Lotterhos sent to us to see how they look.

Ran a 0.8% agarose, low-TAE gel, stained with ethidium bromide.



Look at that! The samples look MUCH nicer when they’re not overloaded and uniformly loaded!

Most have a prominent high molecular weight band (the band that’s closes to the top of the ladder, not the DNA visible in the wells). All exhibit smearing, but 2NF1 shows a weird accumulation of low molecular weight DNA.

Katie’s C.gigas samples (M1, M2, M3) look similar to the Olympia oyster gDNA, however her samples appear to have residual RNA in them (the fuzzy band ~500bp).

Will discuss with Steven which samples he wants to use for bisulfite treament and library construction.