#JPM2021 @GenapSys My Highlights: I think it's fair to say I am more excited than most about this #NGS company, as I see them as an example of how to enter the market while keeping a small profile ($249M raised so far).

They now are aiming at 2021 to ship two new chips: 50MM read chip and 144MM sensor chip (not sure what the difference is between read/sensor).
They show a slide of price per Gb with #Illumina products as a reference, and their products now lined up, I think, for the first time with price per Gb info. Lowest will be the 144MM chip at ~$27/Gb.
As their technology is closer to the #IonTorrent than to the cycle-by-cycle SBS-based sequencing methods, they should have microindel errors in their profile. These look much better, almost null, than the S5 data they show in comparison.
The next slide, also about error rates, either for each base as the run progresses or sliced in GC% windows, has a lot of info, but difficult to read. I think the summary is that the @Genapsys profile shows a bit of microindel error but otherwise comparable to 100bp ILMN data.
The error profile starts low, very low actually, and then it hikes up after cycle 50-100+. In the slide below, they've been naughty and put a textbox on top of their error blue line, trying to hide it: don't think we won't notice these tricks! 😉
They say they've placed or booked more than 110 instruments so far (does that count early access?). All this is based on a 10K GS111 Sequencer + 10K Sequencing Prep instrument. They show long term plans for a GENIUSPrep (high throughput sample prep), but also ...
... but also bigger chips (500MM / 1000MM chip), as well as an Integrated System (zoom in).
Details of the 50M Chip. They seem to have gone from 100bp to 150bp standard now, but raw accuracy still placed at 99.9% at position 125bp. This may be the actual 144M chip but with standard Poisson loading, rendering a bit over 50M reads, or 8Gb per run, which is impressive...
... with a $20K capital investment, comparing the 50M @Genapsys at 8Gb ($54/Gb) and the #Illumina #iSeq100 at 1.2Gb ($542/Gb), that's roughly 8x better yield for Genapsys, and 10x better price per Gb. It makes the #iSeq100 look rather underwhelming in comparison.
The slide about 2021 plans changes the naming from 144M chip to "G4-50M and G4-100M", so this could mean that the nomenclature changes to reads per run rather than the size of the chip. Maybe both based on the 144M chip, but with better loading giving the 50M->100M jump in reads?
No reference to paired-end reads, only indications that 150bp may not be the end of it, and they may be able to go longer than that. Good news about the G4-100M, as it seems they have scope of improvement in loading.
Bonus picture of a "Personalize Genomics!" lab, or lab-at-home.
@d2unroll unroll

More from Finance

You May Also Like

Trump is gonna let the Mueller investigation end all on it's own. It's obvious. All the hysteria of the past 2 weeks about his supposed impending firing of Mueller was a distraction. He was never going to fire Mueller and he's not going to


Mueller's officially end his investigation all on his own and he's gonna say he found no evidence of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election.

Democrats & DNC Media are going to LITERALLY have nothing coherent to say in response to that.

Mueller's team was 100% partisan.

That's why it's brilliant. NOBODY will be able to claim this team of partisan Democrats didn't go the EXTRA 20 MILES looking for ANY evidence they could find of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election

They looked high.

They looked low.

They looked underneath every rock, behind every tree, into every bush.

And they found...NOTHING.

Those saying Mueller will file obstruction charges against Trump: laughable.

What documents did Trump tell the Mueller team it couldn't have? What witnesses were withheld and never interviewed?

THERE WEREN'T ANY.

Mueller got full 100% cooperation as the record will show.
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.


In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.

In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.

This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.

In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.