ArticleMethods (San Diego, Calif.)2012
Genome-wide analysis of replication timing in mammalian cells: troubleshooting problems encountered when comparing different cell types.
Article in Methods (San Diego, Calif.), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficient, quick and easy-to-use DNA replication timing analysis with START-R suite.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2020Article
- Germline DNA replication timing shapes mammalian genome composition.Nucleic acids research · 2018Article
- Genome-wide analysis of replication timing by next-generation sequencing with E/L Repli-seq.Nature protocols · 2018Article
- Stability of patient-specific features of altered DNA replication timing in xenografts of primary human acute lymphoblastic leukemia.Experimental hematology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
DNA is replicated in a defined temporal order that is developmentally regulated and constitutes a unique and stable fingerprint of a given cell type. Recently, we developed a robust assay to profile replication timing genome wide that can be applied to essentially any proliferating cell population. Asynchronously cycling cells are pulse labeled with the nucleotide analog 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine (BrdU). The cells are sorted into S-phase fractions on the basis of DNA content using flow cytometry. BrdU-labeled DNA from each fraction is immunoprecipitated (BrdU IP), amplified, differentially labeled and co-hybridized to a whole-genome comparative genomic hybridization microarray (or sequenced). Since the basic steps of this protocol have been detailed elsewhere, here we focus on problems encountered when adapting this protocol to different cell types or tissue sources and modifications that have been successfully applied to troubleshoot these problems. There is an increasing demand for such studies to address how replication is regulated during development, its relationship to chromatin architecture and other chromosome functions, and the relevance of cell culture models to regulation in the native organismal niche.
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.