RyanLCollins13@NicoChatron Definitely — I should have clarified, we only compared PacBio & Illumina here (no ONT) & also just SVs (setting aside differences in base accuracy & short variants).
ONT cost/benefit seems more competitive. Looking forward to large datasets for apples-to-apples benchmarking!
RyanLCollins13@mike_schatz@DrGeneUK@nanopore@illumina Impressive! Didn’t realize ONT got prices down that far for large-scale commitments
For the analyst like me, competition between platforms is great. Data are data, and the switch to long reads is inevitable. Looking forward to larger datasets for more variant benchmarking
RyanLCollins13@mike_schatz@DrGeneUK And again—all of this is as of 2020 in Boston. Fully expect this will change in the near future.
Excited by the prospect of large-scale long-read WGS in humans! E.g. DECODE’s Nanopore project
But sample sizes affordable with illumina for most of us are still pretty nice option
RyanLCollins13@mike_schatz@DrGeneUK Cheaper sequencing would be great!
For context, a few local factors in my 8:1 estimate above:
- here, economy of scale currently favors ILL WGS
- big $ diff between 30x PacBio CLR vs HiFi
- ONT not evaluated here
But no complaints here about price competitions b/t seq techs!