Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22675423›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Double digest RADseq: an inexpensive method for de novo SNP discovery and genotyping in model and non-model species.

Brant K Peterson, Jesse N Weber, Emily H Kay, Heidi S Fisher, Hopi E Hoekstra

Abstract 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 1,336 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1,336citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1,336 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  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. Assessing differences among elasmobranch nurseries to aid conservation based on a genomics framework.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1,276 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Brant K PetersonDepartment of Organismic & Evolutionary Biology, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America. bpeterson@oeb.harvard.edu
Jesse N Weber
Emily H Kay
Heidi S Fisher
Hopi E Hoekstra

Funding

Genetic basis of sperm competition in PeromyscusF32GM084719 · NIGMS · HARVARD UNIVERSITY · PI FISHER, HEIDI S · 2008 to 2010
$155k
NIGMS NIH HHS F32 GM084719
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to efficiently and accurately determine genotypes is a keystone technology in modern genetics, crucial to studies ranging from clinical diagnostics, to genotype-phenotype association, to reconstruction of ancestry and the detection of selection. To date, high capacity, low cost genotyping has been largely achieved via "SNP chip" microarray-based platforms which require substantial prior knowledge of both genome sequence and variability, and once designed are suitable only for those targeted variable nucleotide sites. This method introduces substantial ascertainment bias and inherently precludes detection of rare or population-specific variants, a major source of information for both population history and genotype-phenotype association. Recent developments in reduced-representation genome sequencing experiments on massively parallel sequencers (commonly referred to as RAD-tag or RADseq) have brought direct sequencing to the problem of population genotyping, but increased cost and procedural and analytical complexity have limited their widespread adoption. Here, we describe a complete laboratory protocol, including a custom combinatorial indexing method, and accompanying software tools to facilitate genotyping across large numbers (hundreds or more) of individuals for a range of markers (hundreds to hundreds of thousands). Our method requires no prior genomic knowledge and achieves per-site and per-individual costs below that of current SNP chip technology, while requiring similar hands-on time investment, comparable amounts of input DNA, and downstream analysis times on the order of hours. Finally, we provide empirical results from the application of this method to both genotyping in a laboratory cross and in wild populations. Because of its flexibility, this modified RADseq approach promises to be applicable to a diversity of biological questions in a wide range of organisms.

Indexed as

GenotypePolymorphism, Single NucleotideAnimalsAnimals, Outbred StrainsDNA Restriction EnzymesGenomeReproducibility of ResultsRodentiaSequence Analysis, DNADNA Restriction Enzymes

Identifiers

PMID22675423
PMCPMC3365034

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.