Skip to main content
. 2017 Mar 31;12(3):e0174852. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174852

Table 4. Comparaison of ambiguous position with two sequencing techniques according to the percentage of MiSeq nucleotide variation.

MiSeq sequencing Sanger sequencing
Sample Location* Depth A C G T % variation Double peak Primers
c15 1008 1114 1032 0 82 0 7,4 "-" 1
c12 2082 1736 0 0 80 1656 4,6 "+" 2
c2 826 1615 0 68 0 1547 4,2 "-" 3
c15 1322 1681 1617 0 64 0 3,8 "-" 1
c12 1858 1723 0 62 0 1661 3,6 "-" 1
c12 2291 2104 70 0 2034 0 3,3 "+" 1
c5 1274 1856 0 1798 0 58 3,1 "+" 4
c3 2191 3735 3636 0 99 0 2,7 "-" 2
c5 1811 3209 3129 0 80 0 2,5 "-" 2
c10 1603 2531 2472 0 59 0 2,3 "-" 2
c2 2558 3174 72 0 3102 0 2,3 "-" 3

* Location indicate nucleotide postion relative to the H77 genome.

† % nucleotide variation at this postion after MiSeq analysis.

‡ Number of nucleotide read at this position according to the numbers of primers used.

"+" Double peak clearly visible on electrophoregram at this position.

"+/-" Double peak no clearly visible on electrophoregram at this position.

"-" No double peak on electrophoregram at this position.