Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22950736›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2012

A mechanistic basis for amplification differences between samples and between genome regions.

Colin D Veal, Peter J Freeman, Kevin Jacobs, Owen Lancaster, Stéphane Jamain, Marion Leboyer, Demetrius Albanes, Reshma R Vaghela, Ivo Gut, Stephen J Chanock and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Rapid Cycle and Extreme Polymerase Chain Reaction.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Bioinformatics Strategies, Challenges, and Opportunities for Next Generation Sequencing-Based HLA Genotyping.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 2019
    Review
  6. The kinetic requirements of extreme qPCR.Biomolecular detection and quantification · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2018
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Multi-template polymerase chain reaction.Biomolecular detection and quantification · 2014
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Colin D VealDepartment of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK.
Peter J Freeman
Kevin Jacobs
Owen Lancaster
Stéphane Jamain
Marion Leboyer
Demetrius Albanes
Reshma R Vaghela
Ivo Gut
Stephen J Chanock
Anthony J Brookes
University of Leicester · GBDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and GeneticsCentro Nacional de Análisis Genómico · ESInserm · FRNational Cancer Institute · USUniversité Paris-Est Créteil · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor many analytical methods the efficiency of DNA amplification varies across the genome and between samples. The most affected genome regions tend to correlate with high C + G content, however this relationship is complex and does not explain why the direction and magnitude of effects varies considerably between samples.

resultsHere, we provide evidence that sequence elements that are particularly high in C + G content can remain annealed even when aggressive melting conditions are applied. In turn, this behavior creates broader 'Thermodynamically Ultra-Fastened' (TUF) regions characterized by incomplete denaturation of the two DNA strands, so reducing amplification efficiency throughout these domains.

conclusionsThis model provides a mechanistic explanation for why some genome regions are particularly difficult to amplify and assay in many procedures, and importantly it also explains inter-sample variability of this behavior. That is, DNA samples of varying quality will carry more or fewer nicks and breaks, and hence their intact TUF regions will have different lengths and so be differentially affected by this amplification suppression mechanism - with 'higher' quality DNAs being the most vulnerable. A major practical consequence of this is that inter-region and inter-sample variability can be largely overcome by employing routine fragmentation methods (e.g. sonication or restriction enzyme digestion) prior to sample amplification.

Indexed as

Base CompositionGenome, HumanHumansNucleic Acid Amplification Techniques

Identifiers

PMID22950736
PMCPMC3469336
OpenAlexW2118280711

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.