TABLE 2.
Information reported by participants to be the most useful (n = 21 respondents)a.
| n | %b | |
| NGS library preparation | 12 | 60 |
| NGS library validation | 7 | 35 |
| Sample pooling | 6 | 30 |
| Tapestation use | 5 | 25 |
| Library normalization | 5 | 25 |
| Qubit use | 2 | 10 |
| QC for sequence reads | 1 | 5 |
| Experimental design considerations | 1 | 5 |
| Sequencing platform overview | 1 | 5 |
| MiSeq runs (hands-on experience) | 1 | 5 |
| Sample pre-processing | 1 | 5 |
| Nextera-XT protocol | 1 | 5 |
| MiSeq run troubleshooting | 1 | 5 |
| Genome assembly (reference mapping and curation) | 15 | 71 |
| Sequence read QC | 8 | 38 |
| De novo sequencing | 4 | 19 |
| Experimental considerations | 3 | 14 |
| Software (including NGS_mapper and IGV) | 3 | 14 |
| Mapping bacterial sequences | 1 | 5 |
| Output analysis | 1 | 5 |
aDerived from open questions: “What information was most useful to you that this NGS library provided?” and “What information was most useful to you that this bioinformatic workshop provided?”. bSome participants indicated > 1 item of information in response. QC, quality control.