ArticlePloS one2010
Elusive copy number variation in the mouse genome.
Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Whole genome resequencing of the Iranian native dogs and wolves to unravel variome during dog domestication.BMC genomics · 2020Article
- Whole Genome Sequencing of the Mutamouse Model Reveals Strain- and Colony-Level Variation, and Genomic Features of the Transgene Integration Site.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Paternal exposure to benzo(a)pyrene induces genome-wide mutations in mouse offspring.Communications biology · 2019Article
- Genome-wide copy number variation (CNV) detection in Nelore cattle reveals highly frequent variants in genome regions harboring QTLs affecting production traits.BMC genomics · 2016Article
- Genome-Wide Detection of CNVs and Their Association with Meat Tenderness in Nelore Cattle.PloS one · 2016Article
- Genomic copy number variation in Mus musculus.BMC genomics · 2015Article
- Gene amplification during differentiation of mammalian neural stem cells in vitro and in vivo.Oncotarget · 2015Article
- Global copy number analyses by next generation sequencing provide insight into pig genome variation.BMC genomics · 2014Article
- Identification of structural variation in mouse genomes.Frontiers in genetics · 2014Review
- Article
- Insights into the regulation of human CNV-miRNAs from the view of their target genes.BMC genomics · 2012Article
- Copy number variation in the cattle genome.Functional & integrative genomics · 2012Review
- Next-generation sequencing of experimental mouse strains.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2012Review
- SNP microarray analyses reveal copy number alterations and progressive genome reorganization during tumor development in SVT/t driven mice breast cancer.BMC cancer · 2012Article
- Discovery of novel variants in genotyping arrays improves genotype retention and reduces ascertainment bias.BMC genomics · 2012Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundArray comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) to detect copy number variants (CNVs) in mammalian genomes has led to a growing awareness of the potential importance of this category of sequence variation as a cause of phenotypic variation. Yet there are large discrepancies between studies, so that the extent of the genome affected by CNVs is unknown. We combined molecular and aCGH analyses of CNVs in inbred mouse strains to investigate this question. PRINCIPAL
findingsUsing a 2.1 million probe array we identified 1,477 deletions and 499 gains in 7 inbred mouse strains. Molecular characterization indicated that approximately one third of the CNVs detected by the array were false positives and we estimate the false negative rate to be more than 50%. We show that low concordance between studies is largely due to the molecular nature of CNVs, many of which consist of a series of smaller deletions and gains interspersed by regions where the DNA copy number is normal.
conclusionsOur results indicate that CNVs detected by arrays may be the coincidental co-localization of smaller CNVs, whose presence is more likely to perturb an aCGH hybridization profile than the effect of an isolated, small, copy number alteration. Our findings help explain the hitherto unexplored discrepancies between array-based studies of copy number variation in the mouse genome.
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.