Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15811185›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2005

Genotyping DNA pools on microarrays: tackling the QTL problem of large samples and large numbers of SNPs.

Emma Meaburn, Lee M Butcher, Lin Liu, Cathy Fernandes, Valerie Hansen, Ammar Al-Chalabi, Robert Plomin, Ian Craig, Leonard C Schalkwyk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing 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

36 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. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. MPDA: microarray pooled DNA analyzer.BMC bioinformatics · 2008
    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

9 authors.

Emma MeaburnSocial, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Box Number P082, Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK. e.meaburn@iop.kcl.ac.uk
Lee M Butcher
Lin Liu
Cathy Fernandes
Valerie Hansen
Ammar Al-Chalabi
Robert Plomin
Ian Craig
Leonard C Schalkwyk

Funding

Wellcome Trust 075492
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundQuantitative trait locus (QTL) theory predicts that genetic influence on complex traits involves multiple genes of small effect size. To detect QTL associations of small effect size, large samples and systematic screens of thousands of DNA markers are required. An efficient solution is to genotype case and control DNA pools using SNP microarrays. We demonstrate that this is practical using DNA pools of 100 individuals.

resultsUsing standard microarray protocols for the Affymetrix GeneChip Mapping 10 K Array Xba 131, we show that relative allele signal (RAS) values provide a quantitative index of allele frequencies in pooled DNA that correlate 0.986 with allele frequencies for 104 SNPs that were genotyped individually for 100 individuals. The sensitivity of the assay was demonstrated empirically in a spiking experiment in which 15% and 20% of one individual's DNA was added to a DNA pool.

conclusionWe conclude that this approach, which we call SNP-MaP (SNP microarrays and pooling), is rapid, cost effective and promises to be a valuable initial screening method in the hunt for QTLs.

Indexed as

Polymorphism, Single NucleotideQuantitative Trait LociAllelesChromosome MappingDNA PrimersGene FrequencyGenotypeHumansOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySequence Analysis, DNASoftwareDNA Primers

Identifiers

PMID15811185
PMCPMC1079828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.