Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24079827›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2013

Comparison of RNA- or LNA-hybrid oligonucleotides in template-switching reactions for high-speed sequencing library preparation.

Matthias Harbers, Sachi Kato, Michiel de Hoon, Yoshihide Hayashizaki, Piero Carninci, Charles Plessy

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Optimization of single strand DNA incorporation reaction by Moloney murine leukaemia virus reverse transcriptase.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2018
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

6 authors.

Matthias HarbersRIKEN Center for Life Science Technologies, Division of Genomics Technologies, Yokohama, Kanagawa 230-0045, Japan. gyouseki@gsc.riken.jp.
Sachi Kato
Michiel de Hoon
Yoshihide Hayashizaki
Piero Carninci
Charles Plessy

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnalyzing the RNA pool or transcription start sites requires effective means to convert RNA into cDNA libraries for digital expression counting. With current high-speed sequencers, it is necessary to flank the cDNAs with specific adapters. Adding template-switching oligonucleotides to reverse transcription reactions is the most commonly used approach when working with very small quantities of RNA even from single cells.

resultsHere we compared the performance of DNA-RNA, DNA-LNA and DNA oligonucleotides in template-switching during nanoCAGE library preparation. Test libraries from rat muscle and HeLa cell RNA were prepared in technical triplicates and sequenced for comparison of the gene coverage and distribution of the reads within transcripts. The DNA-RNA oligonucleotide showed the highest specificity for capped 5' ends of mRNA, whereas the DNA-LNA provided similar gene coverage with more reads falling within exons.

conclusionsWhile confirming the cap-specific preference of DNA-RNA oligonucleotides in template-switching reactions, our data indicate that DNA-LNA hybrid oligonucleotides could potentially find other applications in random RNA sequencing.

Indexed as

Gene LibraryTemplates, GeneticAnimalsGenomeHeLa CellsHumansNucleic Acid HybridizationOligonucleotidesRatsRNASequence Analysis, RNAlocked nucleic acidOligonucleotidesRNA

Identifiers

PMID24079827
PMCPMC3853366

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.