Region molarity and concentration

Hello,

I am using the tapestation to analyze a PCR product. When using the region tool, I have extracted between 250 and 1000, as well as between 250 and 5000, but I am getting concentrations, average sizes and region molarities that do not match up.

Example for one sample:

From [bp] To [bp] Average Size [bp] Conc. [ng/ul] Region Molarity [nmol/l] % of Total
250 5000 814 44.8 133 93.15
250 1000 468 36.7 127 76.46

These numbers look internally consistent (concentration slightly increases, molarity as well) But if you were to calculate the molarity yourself using the average size and given concentration, however, there is a discrepancy for the largest extracted region.

Average Size [bp] Mass weight (dsDNA) Conc. [ng/ul] Conc (nmol/l)
814 501411.2 44.8 89.3478246995679
468 288295.96 36.7 127.299737394863

I don't understand where this discrepancy comes from. I am concerned that the average size is not being calculated correctly, which is the thing I am most interested in here, so that would be troublesome.
Thanks in advance!

  • Hi,

     To give you the best possible answer, and so we can work out what is going on in your particular case please could you reach out to your local tech support team and provide the affected data file? By default, data files are saved in Documents>Agilent>TapeStation Data. The extension of the file is named after the assay type. E.g. The DNA D1000 has a .D1000 extension and the High sensitivity RNA assay file would have a .HSRNA extension. You can find your local support team on the contact us page, if you select your country or region from the drop down menu: https://www.agilent.com/en/contact-us/page.

    I can give you some general guidance on the quantification. Quantification of fragments should be done on the electropherogram view, whereas smears should be analyzed in the region view. The rough algorithm for molarity is as follows: M(Molarity) = W(concentration) x 10/ (b x MW(size in bp)) a= 9 (nmol), 12 (pmol), b = 650 (DNA) or 340 (RNA).

  • Thanks for you advice, I have reached out to them. The formula you gave was indeed the one I used in the example table.

Was this helpful?