ArticleNucleic acids research2004
Improving specificity of DNA hybridization-based methods.
Article in Nucleic acids research, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data aggregation at the level of molecular pathways improves stability of experimental transcriptomic and proteomic data.Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.) · 2017Article
- The OncoFinder algorithm for minimizing the errors introduced by the high-throughput methods of transcriptome analysis.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2014Article
- Rapid EST isolation from chromosome 1R of rye.BMC plant biology · 2008Article
- GREM, a technique for genome-wide isolation and quantitative analysis of promoter active repeats.Nucleic acids research · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Methods based on DNA reassociation in solution with the subsequent PCR amplification of certain hybrid molecules, such as coincidence cloning and subtractive hybridization, all suffer from a common imperfection: cross-hybridization between various types of paralogous repetitive DNA fragments. Although the situation can be slightly improved by the addition of repeat-specific competitor DNA into the hybridization mixture, the cross-hybridization outcome is a significant number of background chimeric clones in resulting DNA libraries. In order to overcome this challenge, we developed a technique called mispaired DNA rejection (MDR), which utilizes a treatment of resulting reassociated DNA with mismatch-specific nucleases. We examined the MDR efficiency using cross-hybridization of complex, whole genomic mixtures derived from human and chimpanzee genomes, digested with frequent-cutter restriction enzyme. We show here that both single-stranded DNA-specific and mismatched double-stranded DNA-specific nucleases can be used for MDR separately or in combination, reducing the background level from 60 to 4% or lower. The technique presented here is of universal usefulness and can be applied to both cDNA and genomic DNA subtractions of very complex DNA mixtures. MDR is also useful for the genome-wide recovery of highly conserved DNA sequences, as we demonstrate by comparing human and pygmy marmoset genomes.
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.