ArticleGenome research2001
Theories and applications for sequencing randomly selected clones.
Article in Genome research, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Coverage theories for metagenomic DNA sequencing based on a generalization of Stevens' theorem.Journal of mathematical biology · 2013Article
- Occupancy modeling, maximum contig size probabilities and designing metagenomics experiments.PloS one · 2010Article
- Statistical aspects of discerning indel-type structural variation via DNA sequence alignment.BMC genomics · 2009Article
- EST-analysis of the thermo-acidophilic red microalga Galdieria sulphuraria reveals potential for lipid A biosynthesis and unveils the pathway of carbon export from rhodoplasts.Plant molecular biology · 2004Article
- Construction and utility of 10-kb libraries for efficient clone-gap closure for rice genome sequencing.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2003Article
- Generalized gap model for bacterial artificial chromosome clone fingerprint mapping and shotgun sequencing.Genome research · 2002Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Theory is developed for the process of sequencing randomly selected large-insert clones. Genome size, library depth, clone size, and clone distribution are considered relevant properties and perfect overlap detection for contig assembly is assumed. Genome-specific and nonrandom effects are neglected. Order of magnitude analysis indicates library depth is of secondary importance compared to the other variables, especially as clone size diminishes. In such cases, the well-known Poisson coverage law is a good approximation. Parameters derived from these models are used to examine performance for the specific case of sequencing random human BAC clones. We compare coverage and redundancy rates for libraries possessing uniform and nonuniform clone distributions. Results are measured against data from map-based human-chromosome-2 sequencing. We conclude that the map-based approach outperforms random clone sequencing, except early in a project. However, simultaneous use of both strategies can be beneficial if a performance-based estimate for halting random clone sequencing is made. Results further show that the random approach yields maximum effectiveness using nonbiased rather than biased libraries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.