Hi list,
this is not strictly BioC, but I know there is quite a few people here
using Nimblegen arrays.
Has anybody else experienced problems with their scans? In particular,
I received data that was scanned with settings giving rise to a
significantly larger amount of saturated features than
expected/wanted.
We had done an experiment comprising 4 hybs, in triplicate (12 chips).
The first batch was very good (well, except from a duff hyb... which
they didn't tell me, and only when I started enquiring -my data looked
weird- they acknowledged the problem and re-hybed it). But the past
month we did the other two sets, and their scans are too strong.
Anybody else?
Jose
--
Dr. Jose I. de las Heras Email: J.delasHeras at
ed.ac.uk
The Wellcome Trust Centre for Cell Biology Phone: +44 (0)131
6513374
Institute for Cell & Molecular Biology Fax: +44 (0)131
6507360
Swann Building, Mayfield Road
University of Edinburgh
Edinburgh EH9 3JR
UK
Hi Jose,
We experienced a similar thing with our custom Nimblegen arrays. We
asked them to rescan the arrays again at a lower setting which
improved
things a bit but we still had some saturated probes.
Cheers,
Alicia
Alicia Oshlack, PhD
Division of Bioinformatics
Walter and Eliza Hall Institute
> Message: 15
> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 01:51:18 +0100
> From: J.delasHeras at ed.ac.uk
> Subject: [BioC] OT: Problems with Nimblegen scans?
> To: bioconductor at stat.math.ethz.ch
> Message-ID: <20070627015118.97eaqyxvk0ggo808 at
www.staffmail.ed.ac.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";
> format="flowed"
>
>
> Hi list,
>
> this is not strictly BioC, but I know there is quite a few people
here
> using Nimblegen arrays.
> Has anybody else experienced problems with their scans? In
particular,
> I received data that was scanned with settings giving rise to a
> significantly larger amount of saturated features than
expected/wanted.
> We had done an experiment comprising 4 hybs, in triplicate (12
chips).
> The first batch was very good (well, except from a duff hyb... which
> they didn't tell me, and only when I started enquiring -my data
looked
> weird- they acknowledged the problem and re-hybed it). But the past
> month we did the other two sets, and their scans are too strong.
>
> Anybody else?
>
> Jose
>
> --
> Dr. Jose I. de las Heras Email:
> J.delasHeras at ed.ac.uk
> The Wellcome Trust Centre for Cell Biology Phone: +44 (0)131
6513374
> Institute for Cell & Molecular Biology Fax: +44 (0)131
6507360
> Swann Building, Mayfield Road
> University of Edinburgh
> Edinburgh EH9 3JR
> UK
>
>
Quoting Alicia Oshlack <oshlack at="" wehi.edu.au="">:
> Hi Jose,
>
> We experienced a similar thing with our custom Nimblegen arrays. We
> asked them to rescan the arrays again at a lower setting which
improved
> things a bit but we still had some saturated probes.
>
> Cheers,
> Alicia
That's great, Alicia. At least they re-scanned yours!
Right now they're refusing to re-do mine [1]... what's most irritating
is that they simply claim all my arrays were scanned in the same way
and look they same... when I have the scatterplots right in front of
me showing that they don't. I did send those to them...
Not impressed with their service. And not the first incident either.
And judging from my personal email (offlist), we're not the only ones
experiencing problems.
Jose
[1] but there's no way we're accepting this.
--
Dr. Jose I. de las Heras Email: J.delasHeras at
ed.ac.uk
The Wellcome Trust Centre for Cell Biology Phone: +44 (0)131
6513374
Institute for Cell & Molecular Biology Fax: +44 (0)131
6507360
Swann Building, Mayfield Road
University of Edinburgh
Edinburgh EH9 3JR
UK