Table 2.
The table enlists the strong points and challenges pertaining to some of the sequencing platforms.
| Platform | Positive points | Challenges |
|---|---|---|
| Sanger (Applied Biosystems 3730xl) | Long read length; good for individual gene analysis | Slow; expensive; poor quality due to primer dimer |
|
| ||
| 454 GS+ | Long read length; fast; low cost for small studies | High error rate for homopolymer read; low throughput; will be phased out in 2016 |
|
| ||
| 454 GS FLX+ | Long read length | High error rate homopolymer read; low throughput; large capital cost; will be phased out in 2016 |
|
| ||
| MiSeq | High throughput; ideal for small genome project | Short read length |
|
| ||
| HiSeq X Ten | High throughput; ideal for whole-genome project | Short read length |
|
| ||
| NextSeq 500 | High throughput; ideal for small to large scale project | Short read length |
|
| ||
| SOLiD 5500xl | High throughput | Short read length; poor output data distribution and arduous data analysis |
|
| ||
| Ion Proton I | Ideal for small project; shorter run time; leading future technology | Higher error rate; larger cost per Mb |
|
| ||
| Ion PGM 318 | Low capital investment and running cost; shorter run time | Higher error rate; larger cost per Mb |
|
| ||
| Polonator G.007 | Cost-effective; open resource | Obsolete |
|
| ||
| Helicos HeliScope | Single-molecule sequencing; simple sample preparation and data analysis | Short read length; obsolete |
|
| ||
| PacBio RS II | Single-molecule real-time sequencing; longest available read length | High error rate |