Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24629208›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2014

Comparison of alternative mixture model methods to analyze bacterial CGH experiments with multi-genome arrays.

Liliana Sofia Cardoso, Cláudia Elvas Suissas, Mário Ramirez, Marília Antunes, Francisco Rodrigues Pinto

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Liliana Sofia Cardoso
Cláudia Elvas Suissas
Mário Ramirez
Marília Antunes
Francisco Rodrigues PintoCentro de Química e Bioquímica, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal. frpinto@fc.ul.pt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMicroarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) is used for rapid comparison of genomes of different bacterial strains. The purpose is to evaluate the distribution of genes from sequenced bacterial strains (control) among unsequenced strains (test). We previously compared the use of single strain versus multiple strain control with arrays covering multiple genomes. The conclusion was that a multiple strain control promoted a better separation of signals between present and absent genes.

findingsWe now extend our previous study by applying the Expectation-Maximization (EM) algorithm to fit a mixture model to the signal distribution in order to classify each gene as present or absent and by comparing different methods for analyzing aCGH data, using combinations of different control strain choices, two different statistical mixture models, with or without normalization, with or without logarithm transformation and with test-over-control or inverse signal ratio calculation. We also assessed the impact of replication on classification accuracy. Higher values of accuracy have been achieved using the ratio of control-over-test intensities, without logarithmic transformation and with a strain mix control. Normalization and the type of mixture model fitted by the EM algorithm did not have a significant impact on classification accuracy. Similarly, using the average of replicate arrays to perform the classification does not significantly improve the results.

conclusionsOur work provides a guiding benchmark comparison of alternative methods to analyze aCGH results that can impact on the analysis of currently ongoing comparative genomic projects or in the re-analysis of published studies.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsComparative Genomic HybridizationComputational BiologyDNA, BacterialGenome, BacterialOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPolymerase Chain ReactionReproducibility of ResultsSpecies SpecificityStaphylococcus aureusStreptococcus pneumoniaeDNA, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID24629208
PMCPMC3995598

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.