Evaluation of miniaturized Illumina DNA preparation protocols for SARS-CoV-2 whole genome sequencing.

The global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has increased the demand for scalable sequencing and diagnostic methods, especially for genomic surveillance. Although next-generation sequencing has enabled large-scale genomic surveillance, the ability to sequence SARS-CoV-2 in some settings has been limited by the cost of sequencing kits and the time-consuming preparations of sequencing libraries. We compared the sequencing outcomes, cost and turn-around times obtained using the standard Illumina DNA Prep kit protocol to three modified protocols with fewer clean-up steps and different reagent volumes (full volume, half volume, one-tenth volume). We processed a single run of 47 samples under each protocol and compared the yield and mean sequence coverage. The sequencing success rate and quality for the four different reactions were as follows: the full reaction was 98.2%, the one-tenth reaction was 98.0%, the full rapid reaction was 97.5% and the half-reaction, was 97.1%. As a result, uniformity of sequence quality indicated that libraries were not affected by the change in protocol. The cost of sequencing was reduced approximately seven-fold and the time taken to prepare the library was reduced from 6.5 hours to 3 hours. The sequencing results obtained using the miniaturised volumes showed comparability to the results obtained using full volumes as described by the manufacturer. The adaptation of the protocol represents a lower-cost, streamlined approach for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing, which can be used to produce genomic data quickly and more affordably, especially in resource-constrained settings

Evaluation of miniaturized Illumina DNA preparation protocols for SARS-CoV-2 whole genome sequencing

The global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has increased the demand for scalable sequencing and diagnostic methods, especially for genomic surveillance. Although next-generation sequencing has enabled large-scale genomic surveillance, the ability to sequence SARS-CoV-2 in some settings has been limited by the cost of sequencing kits and the time-consuming preparations of sequencing libraries. We compared the sequencing outcomes, cost and turn-around times obtained using the standard Illumina DNA Prep kit protocol to three modified protocols with fewer clean-up steps and different reagent volumes (full volume, half volume, one-tenth volume). We processed a single run of 47 samples under each protocol and compared the yield and mean sequence coverage. The sequencing success rate and quality for the four different reactions were as follows: the full reaction was 98.2%, the one-tenth reaction was 98.0%, the full rapid reaction was 97.5% and the half-reaction, was 97.1%. As a result, uniformity of sequence quality indicated that libraries were not affected by the change in protocol. The cost of sequencing was reduced approximately seven-fold and the time taken to prepare the library was reduced from 6.5 hours to 3 hours. The sequencing results obtained using the miniaturised volumes showed comparability to the results obtained using full volumes as described by the manufacturer. The adaptation of the protocol represents a lower-cost, streamlined approach for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing, which can be used to produce genomic data quickly and more affordably, especially in resource-constrained settings

Breakdown of cost.

The global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has increased the demand for scalable sequencing and diagnostic methods, especially for genomic surveillance. Although next-generation sequencing has enabled large-scale genomic surveillance, the ability to sequence SARS-CoV-2 in some settings has been limited by the cost of sequencing kits and the time-consuming preparations of sequencing libraries. We compared the sequencing outcomes, cost and turn-around times obtained using the standard Illumina DNA Prep kit protocol to three modified protocols with fewer clean-up steps and different reagent volumes (full volume, half volume, one-tenth volume). We processed a single run of 47 samples under each protocol and compared the yield and mean sequence coverage. The sequencing success rate and quality for the four different reactions were as follows: the full reaction was 98.2%, the one-tenth reaction was 98.0%, the full rapid reaction was 97.5% and the half-reaction, was 97.1%. As a result, uniformity of sequence quality indicated that libraries were not affected by the change in protocol. The cost of sequencing was reduced approximately seven-fold and the time taken to prepare the library was reduced from 6.5 hours to 3 hours. The sequencing results obtained using the miniaturised volumes showed comparability to the results obtained using full volumes as described by the manufacturer. The adaptation of the protocol represents a lower-cost, streamlined approach for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing, which can be used to produce genomic data quickly and more affordably, especially in resource-constrained settings.</div

Sequencing coverage of the four methods used.

The global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has increased the demand for scalable sequencing and diagnostic methods, especially for genomic surveillance. Although next-generation sequencing has enabled large-scale genomic surveillance, the ability to sequence SARS-CoV-2 in some settings has been limited by the cost of sequencing kits and the time-consuming preparations of sequencing libraries. We compared the sequencing outcomes, cost and turn-around times obtained using the standard Illumina DNA Prep kit protocol to three modified protocols with fewer clean-up steps and different reagent volumes (full volume, half volume, one-tenth volume). We processed a single run of 47 samples under each protocol and compared the yield and mean sequence coverage. The sequencing success rate and quality for the four different reactions were as follows: the full reaction was 98.2%, the one-tenth reaction was 98.0%, the full rapid reaction was 97.5% and the half-reaction, was 97.1%. As a result, uniformity of sequence quality indicated that libraries were not affected by the change in protocol. The cost of sequencing was reduced approximately seven-fold and the time taken to prepare the library was reduced from 6.5 hours to 3 hours. The sequencing results obtained using the miniaturised volumes showed comparability to the results obtained using full volumes as described by the manufacturer. The adaptation of the protocol represents a lower-cost, streamlined approach for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing, which can be used to produce genomic data quickly and more affordably, especially in resource-constrained settings.</div

Comparison of the rapid and non-rapid methods.

The global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has increased the demand for scalable sequencing and diagnostic methods, especially for genomic surveillance. Although next-generation sequencing has enabled large-scale genomic surveillance, the ability to sequence SARS-CoV-2 in some settings has been limited by the cost of sequencing kits and the time-consuming preparations of sequencing libraries. We compared the sequencing outcomes, cost and turn-around times obtained using the standard Illumina DNA Prep kit protocol to three modified protocols with fewer clean-up steps and different reagent volumes (full volume, half volume, one-tenth volume). We processed a single run of 47 samples under each protocol and compared the yield and mean sequence coverage. The sequencing success rate and quality for the four different reactions were as follows: the full reaction was 98.2%, the one-tenth reaction was 98.0%, the full rapid reaction was 97.5% and the half-reaction, was 97.1%. As a result, uniformity of sequence quality indicated that libraries were not affected by the change in protocol. The cost of sequencing was reduced approximately seven-fold and the time taken to prepare the library was reduced from 6.5 hours to 3 hours. The sequencing results obtained using the miniaturised volumes showed comparability to the results obtained using full volumes as described by the manufacturer. The adaptation of the protocol represents a lower-cost, streamlined approach for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing, which can be used to produce genomic data quickly and more affordably, especially in resource-constrained settings.</div

Qubit concentrations of all four methods.

The global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has increased the demand for scalable sequencing and diagnostic methods, especially for genomic surveillance. Although next-generation sequencing has enabled large-scale genomic surveillance, the ability to sequence SARS-CoV-2 in some settings has been limited by the cost of sequencing kits and the time-consuming preparations of sequencing libraries. We compared the sequencing outcomes, cost and turn-around times obtained using the standard Illumina DNA Prep kit protocol to three modified protocols with fewer clean-up steps and different reagent volumes (full volume, half volume, one-tenth volume). We processed a single run of 47 samples under each protocol and compared the yield and mean sequence coverage. The sequencing success rate and quality for the four different reactions were as follows: the full reaction was 98.2%, the one-tenth reaction was 98.0%, the full rapid reaction was 97.5% and the half-reaction, was 97.1%. As a result, uniformity of sequence quality indicated that libraries were not affected by the change in protocol. The cost of sequencing was reduced approximately seven-fold and the time taken to prepare the library was reduced from 6.5 hours to 3 hours. The sequencing results obtained using the miniaturised volumes showed comparability to the results obtained using full volumes as described by the manufacturer. The adaptation of the protocol represents a lower-cost, streamlined approach for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing, which can be used to produce genomic data quickly and more affordably, especially in resource-constrained settings.</div

All artic SARS-CoV-2 primers used in this study.

The global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has increased the demand for scalable sequencing and diagnostic methods, especially for genomic surveillance. Although next-generation sequencing has enabled large-scale genomic surveillance, the ability to sequence SARS-CoV-2 in some settings has been limited by the cost of sequencing kits and the time-consuming preparations of sequencing libraries. We compared the sequencing outcomes, cost and turn-around times obtained using the standard Illumina DNA Prep kit protocol to three modified protocols with fewer clean-up steps and different reagent volumes (full volume, half volume, one-tenth volume). We processed a single run of 47 samples under each protocol and compared the yield and mean sequence coverage. The sequencing success rate and quality for the four different reactions were as follows: the full reaction was 98.2%, the one-tenth reaction was 98.0%, the full rapid reaction was 97.5% and the half-reaction, was 97.1%. As a result, uniformity of sequence quality indicated that libraries were not affected by the change in protocol. The cost of sequencing was reduced approximately seven-fold and the time taken to prepare the library was reduced from 6.5 hours to 3 hours. The sequencing results obtained using the miniaturised volumes showed comparability to the results obtained using full volumes as described by the manufacturer. The adaptation of the protocol represents a lower-cost, streamlined approach for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing, which can be used to produce genomic data quickly and more affordably, especially in resource-constrained settings.</div

Boxplots showing the sequence coverage %, and number of Ns for the different experimental categories, with the number of data points, and means of each category labelled.

The statistical significance results are also shown for each pairwise comparison (ns: non-significant). The boxes indicate the median (middle line) and the interquartile ranges (box edges) for each category. RXN describes the reaction, four different reactions were tested.</p

Reagent volumes used for tiling PCR.

The global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has increased the demand for scalable sequencing and diagnostic methods, especially for genomic surveillance. Although next-generation sequencing has enabled large-scale genomic surveillance, the ability to sequence SARS-CoV-2 in some settings has been limited by the cost of sequencing kits and the time-consuming preparations of sequencing libraries. We compared the sequencing outcomes, cost and turn-around times obtained using the standard Illumina DNA Prep kit protocol to three modified protocols with fewer clean-up steps and different reagent volumes (full volume, half volume, one-tenth volume). We processed a single run of 47 samples under each protocol and compared the yield and mean sequence coverage. The sequencing success rate and quality for the four different reactions were as follows: the full reaction was 98.2%, the one-tenth reaction was 98.0%, the full rapid reaction was 97.5% and the half-reaction, was 97.1%. As a result, uniformity of sequence quality indicated that libraries were not affected by the change in protocol. The cost of sequencing was reduced approximately seven-fold and the time taken to prepare the library was reduced from 6.5 hours to 3 hours. The sequencing results obtained using the miniaturised volumes showed comparability to the results obtained using full volumes as described by the manufacturer. The adaptation of the protocol represents a lower-cost, streamlined approach for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing, which can be used to produce genomic data quickly and more affordably, especially in resource-constrained settings.</div

Fig 1 -

A. Workflow using the Illumina DNA library preparation kit for both the full method as per manufacturer’s instructions (left) as well the adapted rapid method (right). An overall reduction of 3.5 hours was achieved using the adapted rapid method. B. Fragment analysis of the 4nM pool of the full reaction, full method. C. Fragment analysis of the pooled amplicon library of the one-tenth reaction, rapid method.</p