I'm not convinced that it is the XL upgrades doing this. This is a
long-standing problem with ABI's tracking algorithms (it comes from
training your software on "perfect" gels :-) ) which seems to have been
made worse in the v3.0 software. We have given up on v3.0 and returned to
using v2.1.2 and have far fewer tracking night mares with this. Rough
stats put 7 out of 10 gels mistracking with v3.0, while only 4 out of 10
would mistrack with v2.1.2...kind of takes the "automated" out of
automated
sequencing....hmph.
Cheers,
George
In article <5gk2in$qta at net.bio.net>, David Needleman,
davidn at utmmg.med.uth.tmc.edu wrote:
::In article <5g6ksq$qmj at net.bio.net> andy davies, daviesam at icrf.icnet.uk::writes:
::::We have installed an XL upgrade on our 377. We typically load either 36
::or 48 lanes and have had no problems loading either configuration.
::::Unfortunately, I cant say the same for the tracking. As long as every
::lane contains data, the tracking problems are usually minimal. However,
::if one or more lanes has no sequence data or very little data, tracking
::can become a nightmare. The tracking lines are there, but they are
::evenly spaced and have not tracked a single bit of data. We either have
::to manually retrack all the lanes or go back to the sample sheet,
::determine which lanes have no data, tell the computer that these lanes
::contain no sample, autotrack and hope for the best.
::::Good luck,
::::David
::Director, Molecular Genetics Core Facility
::Microbiology and Molecular Genetics
::UT-Houston Medical School
--
"People are DNA's way of making more DNA."(Edward O. Wilson, 1975)
\ / \ \ / \ \ / \ \ / George Mayhew \ / \ \ / \ \ / \ \
\ /\ \ /\ \ E. coli Genome Sequencing Project \ /\ \ /\ \
\/ \__\/ \__\mayhew at midgaard.genetics.wisc.edu__\/ \__\/ \__\
