Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22427938›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Analysis of microsatellite variation in Drosophila melanogaster with population-scale genome sequencing.

John W Fondon, Andy Martin, Stephen Richards, Richard A Gibbs, David Mittelman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Generating and working with Drosophila cell cultures: Current challenges and opportunities.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Developmental biology · 2019
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Characterization of Duck (Frontiers in genetics · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Motif mismatches in microsatellites: insights from genome-wide investigation among 20 insect species.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2015
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

John W FondonDepartment of Biology, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas, United States of America.
Andy Martin
Stephen Richards
Richard A Gibbs
David Mittelman
Virginia Tech · USBaylor College of Medicine · USBaylor Genetics · USThe University of Texas at Arlington · US

Funding

The Human Genome Sequencing CenterU54HG003273 · NHGRI · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI GIBBS, RICHARD A · 2004 to 2015
$341.3M
NHGRI NIH HHS HG003273NHGRI NIH HHS U54 HG003273
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome sequencing technologies promise to revolutionize our understanding of genetics, evolution, and disease by making it feasible to survey a broad spectrum of sequence variation on a population scale. However, this potential can only be realized to the extent that methods for extracting and interpreting distinct forms of variation can be established. The error profiles and read length limitations of early versions of next-generation sequencing technologies rendered them ineffective for some sequence variant types, particularly microsatellites and other tandem repeats, and fostered the general misconception that such variants are inherently inaccessible to these platforms. At the same time, tandem repeats have emerged as important sources of functional variation. Tandem repeats are often located in and around genes, and frequent mutations in their lengths exert quantitative effects on gene function and phenotype, rapidly degrading linkage disequilibrium between markers and traits. Sensitive identification of these variants in large-scale next-gen sequencing efforts will enable more comprehensive association studies capable of revealing previously invisible associations. We present a population-scale analysis of microsatellite repeats using whole-genome data from 158 inbred isolates from the Drosophila Genetics Reference Panel, a collection of over 200 extensively phenotypically characterized isolates from a single natural population, to uncover processes underlying repeat mutation and to enable associations with behavioral, morphological, and life-history traits. Analysis of repeat variation from next-generation sequence data will also enhance studies of genome stability and neurodegenerative diseases.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationAnimalsDrosophila melanogasterGenetics, PopulationGenomeGenotypeMicrosatellite RepeatsMutation

Identifiers

PMID22427938
PMCPMC3299726
OpenAlexW2044828847

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.