Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Dev Comp Immunol. 2014 Feb 6;45(1):56–66. doi: 10.1016/j.dci.2014.01.022

Table 1.

Comparison of characteristics of Next Generation Sequencing versus traditional Sanger sequencing, considering same budget/effort.

NGS Sanger

Cost per millions base 0.07 – 10 $ <<< 2400 $

Read length 35 – 900 bp < = 400–900 bp

Accuracy 98 – 99.9% < 99.999%

Amount of template needed / sequence NGS < << Sanger

Multiplexing of samples (individuals/treatment) (or simultanuous analysis of multiple samples) NGS >>> Sanger

Reconstruction of full length contig NGS < = Sanger*

Genome / Transcriptome assembly NGS >>> Sanger
 Recovery of rare sequences NGS >> Sanger
 Sampling of unknown sequences NGS > Sanger
 Representation of members of genefamilies NGS >> Sanger
 Sampling of variant sequences |“complete”** versus randomly selective
 Recovery of symbiont/pathogen sequences NGS > Sanger
 Recovery of methylated sequences** NGS > Sanger
 Protein- nucleic acid inetractions** NGS > Sanger

Information on expression level NGS > Sanger

miRNA profiling NGS >>> Sanger

Comprehensive sequence comparison among species NGS >> Sanger
*

read-lengths for NGS approaching high throughput Sanger sequencing [BASED ON (EST average= ~400bp Sanger, close to 454)]

**

“complete” within confines of sequencing bias by different techniques.

***

using appropriately prepared template