Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18230148›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2008

A process for analysis of microarray comparative genomics hybridisation studies for bacterial genomes.

Ben Carter, Guanghui Wu, Martin J Woodward, Muna F Anjum

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Livestock-Associated Methicillin-ResistantFrontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ben CarterDepartment of Food and Environmental Safety, Veterinary Laboratories Agency-Weybridge, New Haw, Addlestone, Surrey KT15 3NB, UK. b.carter@vla.defra.gsi.gov.uk
Guanghui Wu
Martin J Woodward
Muna F Anjum
Animal and Plant Health Agency · GBVeterinary Medicines Directorate · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMicroarray based comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) experiments have been used to study numerous biological problems including understanding genome plasticity in pathogenic bacteria. Typically such experiments produce large data sets that are difficult for biologists to handle. Although there are some programmes available for interpretation of bacterial transcriptomics data and CGH microarray data for looking at genetic stability in oncogenes, there are none specifically to understand the mosaic nature of bacterial genomes. Consequently a bottle neck still persists in accurate processing and mathematical analysis of these data. To address this shortfall we have produced a simple and robust CGH microarray data analysis process that may be automated in the future to understand bacterial genomic diversity.

resultsThe process involves five steps: cleaning, normalisation, estimating gene presence and absence or divergence, validation, and analysis of data from test against three reference strains simultaneously. Each stage of the process is described and we have compared a number of methods available for characterising bacterial genomic diversity, for calculating the cut-off between gene presence and absence or divergence, and shown that a simple dynamic approach using a kernel density estimator performed better than both established, as well as a more sophisticated mixture modelling technique. We have also shown that current methods commonly used for CGH microarray analysis in tumour and cancer cell lines are not appropriate for analysing our data.

conclusionAfter carrying out the analysis and validation for three sequenced Escherichia coli strains, CGH microarray data from 19 E. coli O157 pathogenic test strains were used to demonstrate the benefits of applying this simple and robust process to CGH microarray studies using bacterial genomes.

Indexed as

Genome, BacterialAlgorithmsData Interpretation, StatisticalEscherichia coliEscherichia coli K12Escherichia coli O157Gene DosageGenomicsModels, StatisticalNucleic Acid HybridizationOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisSensitivity and SpecificitySpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID18230148
PMCPMC2262894
OpenAlexW2142095146

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.