Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25815306›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of genomics2015

Validation of simple sequence length polymorphism regions of commonly used mouse strains for marker assisted speed congenics screening.

Channabasavaiah B Gurumurthy, Poonam S Joshi, Scott G Kurz, Masato Ohtsuka, Rolen M Quadros, Donald W Harms, K C Kent Lloyd

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of genomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. Guideline
  2. Generation of mouse and rat xenogeneic ovariesAnimal cells and systems · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Antiretroviral Drug Metabolism in Humanized PXR-CAR-CYP3A-NOG Mice.The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2018
    Article
  8. 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

7 authors.

Channabasavaiah B GurumurthyMouse Genome Engineering Core Facility, Department of Genetics, Cell Biology and Anatomy, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-5915, USA.
Poonam S JoshiMouse Genome Engineering Core Facility, Department of Genetics, Cell Biology and Anatomy, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-5915, USA.
Scott G KurzMouse Genome Engineering Core Facility, Department of Genetics, Cell Biology and Anatomy, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-5915, USA.
Masato OhtsukaDepartment of Molecular Life Science, Division of Basic Medical Science and Molecular Medicine, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa 259-1193, Japan.
Rolen M QuadrosMouse Genome Engineering Core Facility, Department of Genetics, Cell Biology and Anatomy, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-5915, USA.
Donald W HarmsMouse Genome Engineering Core Facility, Department of Genetics, Cell Biology and Anatomy, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-5915, USA.
K C Kent LloydMouse Biology Program, University of California, Davis, 2795 2nd Street, Davis, CA 95618, USA.

Funding

UCD Mutant Mouse Regional Resource CenterU42OD012210 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI KC KENT LLOYD · 2012 to 2026
$29.2M
KOMP Phase II Mouse Production and CryopreservationU42OD011175 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI LLOYD, KC KENT · 2012 to 2015
$18.9M
KOMP Phase II Mouse PhenotypingU54HG006364 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI LLOYD, KC KENT · 2011 to 2015
$16.3M
UNMC Histology/Imaging and Creighton University Imaging Core FacilityP30GM110768 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER · PI SMITH, SHELLEY D · 2014 to 2018
$5.1M
The Molecular Biology of Neurosurgery SystemsP20GM103471 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER · PI SMITH, SHELLEY D · 2012 to 2013
$4.1M
Center for Humanized MiceR24OD018546 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER · PI GORANTLA, SANTHI, POLUEKTOVA, LARISA Y · 2014 to 2017
$3.2M
NHGRI NIH HHS U54 HG006364NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103471NIGMS NIH HHS P30 GM110768NIH HHS R24 OD018546NIH HHS U42 OD011175NIH HHS U42 OD012210
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Marker assisted speed congenics technique is commonly used to facilitate backcrossing of mouse strains in nearly half the time it normally takes otherwise. Traditionally, the technique is performed by analyzing PCR amplified regions of simple sequence length polymorphism (SSLP) markers between the recipient and donor strains: offspring with the highest number of markers showing the recipient genome across all chromosomes is chosen for the next generation. Although there are well-defined panels of SSLP makers established between certain pairs of mice strains, they are incomplete for most strains. The availability of well-established marker sets for speed congenic screens would enable the scientific community to transfer mutations across strain backgrounds. In this study, we tested the suitability of over 400 SSLP marker sets among 10 mouse strains commonly used for generating genetically engineered models. The panel of markers presented here can readily identify the specified strains and will be quite useful in marker assisted speed congenic screens. Moreover, unlike newer single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array methods which require sophisticated equipment, the SSLP markers panel described here only uses PCR and agarose gel electrophoresis of amplified products; therefore it can be performed in most research laboratories.

Identifiers

PMID25815306
PMCPMC4359823

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.