Before you collect a single sample, a 30–60 minute conversation can prevent the most expensive mistakes in sequencing study design — wrong method, insufficient depth, inadequate replication, avoidable batch effects. This consultation is free, and there is no obligation to proceed with us.
Sequencing has become technically reliable. The failures that actually happen in modern genomics studies are almost never the sequencer’s fault. They are study design failures — the wrong method chosen for the question, insufficient sequencing depth that leaves rare taxa undetected, too few biological replicates to detect the effect size of interest, a collection protocol that degrades RNA before it ever reaches the lab, or batch effects introduced by splitting cohorts across multiple sequencing runs without planning for it. These failures are expensive: the cost is not just the sequencing run itself but the months of work that preceded it.
A pre-project consultation costs nothing and typically takes 30–60 minutes. In that time, we can confirm whether the method you’re considering is appropriate for your question, identify any red flags in your planned sample collection protocol, recommend sequencing depth based on your specific community or transcriptome complexity, and flag statistical issues that would make the results unpublishable. If you’re writing a grant application, a consultation at the study design stage also produces a defensible methods section — and we can provide written technical input for grant bioinformatics sections on request.
We are not consultants in the commercial sense — we do not charge for this time and we do not push you toward more expensive services. If amplicon sequencing genuinely answers your question as well as metagenomics, we will recommend it. If your sample collection protocol has a fundamental flaw, we’ll tell you before you collect two hundred samples and discover the problem at extraction. If an existing dataset could answer your question without any new sequencing, we’ll say so. The consultation exists because we’d rather turn down a project than deliver a dataset that doesn’t answer your question.
What makes a consultation productive is a clear biological question — not a sequencing method. “I want to do 16S sequencing on my samples” is less useful than “I want to know whether antibiotic treatment changes the gut microbiome composition of my mouse model, and if so, which groups are affected.” The second framing lets us think about the right method, the right depth, the right controls, and the right statistical approach. The first one assumes a method choice that may or may not be correct.
The clearer your biological question, the more useful the consultation. Useful to share: your organism / sample type, what biological difference or change you’re trying to detect, approximate cohort size and number of conditions, how samples are currently stored or collected, and any existing data (even from other methods) that might inform the design. You do not need to know anything about sequencing to benefit from a consultation.
You don't need to know anything about sequencing to benefit from a consultation. Bring your biological question and your sample type — we'll work backwards from there to the appropriate method.
If you have a biological question but haven't done sequencing before, a consultation is the most efficient starting point. We'll explain the main options (metagenomics, amplicon, RNA-seq, WGS) in the context of your specific question, identify what's feasible within a realistic budget, and tell you what you need to prepare before any samples are committed. No prior knowledge of sequencing is required or expected.
Grant reviewers increasingly scrutinise sequencing methods sections. Underpowered study designs, vague depth specifications, or missing controls are common weaknesses in funding applications. A consultation at the grant writing stage lets us provide a technically defensible methods section — including justification for depth, replication strategy, and analysis pipeline choices — that is specific to your project. We provide written technical input for grant applications on request, free of charge.
FFPE tissue, clinical biopsies, low-biomass environmental samples, unusual organisms, dual RNA-seq, samples collected under challenging field conditions — any project where the standard approach may not apply directly benefits from an upfront discussion. We've encountered most unusual sample types and will tell you honestly what's feasible, what modifications are needed, and where the risks are.
This is the most common question we receive. The answer depends on: your biological question (compositional only, or functional?), the resolution you need (genus-level or species/strain?), your cohort size, and your budget. We can often give a clear recommendation in a single conversation, and where the choice isn't obvious, we can model the cost and information tradeoff explicitly. We have no financial incentive to recommend metagenomics over amplicon — we charge more for metagenomics, but we'd rather do fewer expensive projects than generate datasets that don't answer your question.
Failed or disappointing sequencing studies — insufficient depth, bad extraction, no statistical signal despite real biological differences, a dataset that passed QC but can't answer the question — are more common than published literature suggests. A post-mortem consultation can usually identify what went wrong and whether the existing data is salvageable. If you're planning a follow-up study, we'll design it to avoid the same failure mode.
We adapt to your project — not every consultation covers every topic. This is the full scope of what we can address; most consultations focus on three or four of these areas in depth.
Three steps from initial contact to a clear plan in writing. Most projects move from consultation to quote within two or three working days.
Use the contact form or email us directly. Tell us your biological question, sample type, approximate number of samples and conditions, and any existing data or prior attempts. You don't need to know which sequencing method you want — describing the question is enough. We respond within one business day.
No details are too vague or too preliminary. We're happy to help at any stage of planning.
Typically 30–60 minutes by video call, or an email exchange for simpler questions. We cover method selection, study design, sample handling considerations, and any specific concerns about your project. We'll ask questions to understand your biological question in depth — the more specific the question, the better the advice. If the consultation raises issues that need more thought, we'll follow up.
For complex projects, multi-investigator studies, or grant applications, more than one consultation session is common and always free.
After the consultation, we send a written summary of our recommendations — method, depth, replication strategy, controls, sample handling, timeline, and any project-specific considerations. If you decide to proceed with us, this forms the basis of a detailed quote and project agreement. If you decide to use a different laboratory or approach, the written summary is still yours to use. No obligation in either case.
The written summary is designed to be used directly in grant applications or study design documents — not as a sales document.
It’s genuinely free, with no obligation. The consultation exists because poorly designed sequencing projects are bad for everyone: they waste your research budget, produce datasets that can’t answer the question they were designed for, and result in papers with methodological weaknesses. We would rather spend an hour helping you design a study correctly — even if you end up sequencing with a different laboratory — than sequence a project that fails. A small number of consultations do result in projects we can’t or shouldn’t take on (wrong method, sample type outside our validated workflows, budget that doesn’t match what the study needs). In those cases, we’ll say so clearly and suggest alternatives. The consultation is not a sales call.
Absolutely. Many of our consultations are with PhD students, postdocs, and early-stage investigators who are designing their first sequencing experiment or working outside their primary area of expertise. There are no stupid questions in study design — the questions that feel basic are often the most important ones. If you are working on a student project with limited budget, we’ll be honest about what is feasible at different price points, including whether a minimal viable design exists that answers your core question within a constrained budget.
Yes. We provide written technical input for methods sections free of charge. This typically includes: sequencing platform and read configuration, library preparation method, depth justification specific to your sample type, bioinformatics pipeline with software versions, quality control approach, and a brief justification of key design decisions. We can review draft methods sections and provide specific revisions, or write from scratch from a description of the project. Grant reviewers increasingly expect quantitative justification of sequencing depth and replication — we can provide this. For large grants with complex study designs, allow a week of lead time.
This is one of the most common consultation requests we receive. Share what you know about collection conditions, storage history, any QC data you have (extraction yields, RIN values, gel images), and the biological question. We’ll give you an honest assessment of what’s recoverable, what the likely quality issues are, and whether it’s worth attempting sequencing. In many cases, already-collected samples can be used if the extraction and library prep approaches are adapted appropriately. In some cases, the samples are genuinely unsuitable and the most useful thing we can do is prevent you from spending money on a sequencing run that will produce uninterpretable results.
Yes. Industrial and commercial sequencing questions are often more straightforward than academic ones — the question is usually better defined, and the decision framework (cost per answer, turnaround requirement) is more explicit. If you are evaluating metagenomics or amplicon sequencing for a QC or monitoring application, developing a microbiome-based diagnostic, or characterising a production organism, a consultation is the fastest way to establish whether sequencing is the right tool and what the realistic cost and turnaround would be for your specific application. NDAs are available on request for commercial projects.