Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11501435›Full record

ArticleEcotoxicology (London, England)2001

Choice of methodology for assessing genetic impacts of environmental stressors: polymorphism and reproducibility of RAPD and AFLP fingerprints.

M J Bagley, S L Anderson, B May

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Ecotoxicology (London, England), 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M J BagleyUniversity of California Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA. Bagley.mark@epa.gov
S L Anderson
B May
University of California, Davis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PCR-based multi-locus DNA fingerprints represent one of the most informative and cost-effective measures of genetic diversity and are useful population-level biomarkers of toxicologic and other anthropogenic impacts. However, concerns about reproducibility of DNA fingerprints have limited their wider use in environmental biology. We assessed polymorphism and reproducibility of two common fingerprinting techniques, RAPD (randomly amplified polymorphic DNA) and AFLP (amplified fragment length polymorphism), in pedigreed populations of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) to derive general rules for selective removal of problematic fingerprint bands. We found that by excluding bands that comprised less than 1% of total intensity, and by excluding the largest and smallest 10% of the bands, we could achieve nearly 100% reproducibility of AFLP fingerprints. Similar application of band exclusion criteria to RAPD fingerprints did not significantly enhance their reproducibility, and at least 15% of RAPD bands were not fully repeatable, heritable, or transmittable. The RAPD technique produced more polymorphic fingerprints than AFLP; however, considering that a substantial proportion of RAPD markers did not demonstrate Mendelian inheritance patterns, the AFLP methodology is to be preferred for future research.

Indexed as

Nucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesRandom Amplified Polymorphic DNA TechniqueAnimalsDNA FingerprintingDNA PrimersEnvironmental PollutantsGenetic MarkersOncorhynchus mykissReproducibility of ResultsDNA PrimersEnvironmental PollutantsGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID11501435
OpenAlexW1549001849

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.