Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12466297›Full record

ArticleGenome research2002

Rapid mapping of zebrafish mutations with SNPs and oligonucleotide microarrays.

Heather L Stickney, Jeremy Schmutz, Ian G Woods, Caleb C Holtzer, Mark C Dickson, Peter D Kelly, Richard M Myers, William S Talbot

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

46 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. A countermeasure development pipeline.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2016
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Heather L StickneyDepartment of Developmental Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, USA.
Jeremy Schmutz
Ian G Woods
Caleb C Holtzer
Mark C Dickson
Peter D Kelly
Richard M Myers
William S Talbot

Funding

Functional Anaylsis of the Zebrafish GenomeR01RR012349 · NCRR · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI TALBOT, WILLIAM S · 1997 to 2004
$1.4M
NCRR NIH HHS R01 RR012349NCRR NIH HHS RR12349
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large-scale genetic screens in zebrafish have identified thousands of mutations in hundreds of essential genes. The genetic mapping of these mutations is necessary to link DNA sequences to the gene functions defined by mutant phenotypes. Here, we report two advances that will accelerate the mapping of zebrafish mutations: (1) The construction of a first generation single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) map of the zebrafish genome comprising 2035 SNPs and 178 small insertions/deletions, and (2) the development of a method for mapping mutations in which hundreds of SNPs can be scored in parallel with an oligonucleotide microarray. We have demonstrated the utility of the microarray technique in crosses with haploid and diploid embryos by mapping two known mutations to their previously identified locations. We have also used this approach to localize four previously unmapped mutations. We expect that mapping with SNPs and oligonucleotide microarrays will accelerate the molecular analysis of zebrafish mutations.

Indexed as

AnimalsChromosome MappingGenetic MarkersGenomeMutationOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPolymerase Chain ReactionPolymorphism, Single NucleotideZebrafishGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID12466297
PMCPMC187572

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.