Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19053157›Full record

ArticleElectrophoresis2008

DNA sequencing by microchip electrophoresis using mixtures of high- and low-molar mass poly(N,N-dimethylacrylamide) matrices.

Daniel G Hert, Christopher P Fredlake, Annelise E Barron

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Electrophoresis, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Daniel G HertDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA.
Christopher P Fredlake
Annelise E Barron

Funding

Microbead INtegrated DNA Sequencer (MINDS) SystemR01HG003583 · NHGRI · MICROCHIP BIOTECHNOLOGIES, INC. · PI JOVANOVICH, STEVAN B · 2004 to 2007
$6.1M
Ultrafast DNA sequencing on microfluidic chips: Matrices and mechanismsR01HG001970 · NHGRI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI BARRON, ANNELISE EMILY · 1999 to 2009
$3.1M
NHGRI NIH HHS 2 R01 HG001970NHGRI NIH HHS 5 R01 HG003583NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG001970NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG003583
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous studies have reported that mixed molar mass polymer matrices show enhanced DNA sequencing fragment separation compared with matrices formulated from a single average molar mass. Here, we describe a systematic study to investigate the effects of varying the amounts of two different average molar mass polymers on the DNA sequencing ability of poly(N,N-dimethylacrylamide) (pDMA) sequencing matrices in microfluidic chips. Two polydisperse samples of pDMA, with weight-average molar masses of 3.5 MDa and 770 kDa, were mixed at various fractional concentrations while maintaining the overall polymer concentration at 5% w/v. We show that although the separation of short DNA fragments depends strongly on the overall solution concentration of the polymer, inclusion of the high-molar mass polymer is essential to achieve read lengths of interest (>400 bases) for many sequencing applications. Our results also show that one of the blended matrices, comprised of 3% 3.5 MDa pDMA and 2% 770 kDa pDMA, yields similar sequencing read lengths (>520 bases on average) to the high-molar mass matrix alone, while also providing a fivefold reduction in zero-shear viscosity. These results indicate that the long read lengths achieved in a viscous, high-molar mass polymer matrix are also possible to achieve in a tuned, blended matrix of high- and low-molar mass polymers with a much lower overall solution viscosity.

Indexed as

AcrylamidesDNAElectrophoresis, MicrochipHumansMicrofluidicsMolecular WeightSequence Analysis, DNAViscosityAcrylamidesDNApoly(N,N-dimethylacrylamide)

Identifiers

PMID19053157
PMCPMC3064962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.