ArticlePloS one2016
Enhanced Methylation Analysis by Recovery of Unsequenceable Fragments.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epigenetic regulation as a therapeutic target in the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum.Malaria journal · 2024Review
- Exploring the crop epigenome: a comparison of DNA methylation profiling techniques.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Review
- Current and Emerging Technologies for the Analysis of the Genome-Wide and Locus-Specific DNA Methylation Patterns.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2022Article
- Malaria in the 'Omics Era'.Genes · 2021Review
- Discovery of a new predominant cytosine DNA modification that is linked to gene expression in malaria parasites.Nucleic acids research · 2020Article
- Comparison of whole-genome bisulfite sequencing library preparation strategies identifies sources of biases affecting DNA methylation data.Genome biology · 2018Article
- Base resolution maps reveal the importance of 5-hydroxymethylcytosine in a human glioblastoma.NPJ genomic medicine · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Bisulfite sequencing is a valuable tool for mapping the position of 5-methylcytosine in the genome at single base resolution. However, the associated chemical treatment causes strand scission, which depletes the number of sequenceable DNA fragments in a library and thus necessitates PCR amplification. The AT-rich nature of the library generated from bisulfite treatment adversely affects this amplification, resulting in the introduction of major biases that can confound methylation analysis. Here, we report a method that enables more accurate methylation analysis, by rebuilding bisulfite-damaged components of a DNA library. This recovery after bisulfite treatment (ReBuilT) approach enables PCR-free bisulfite sequencing from low nanogram quantities of genomic DNA. We apply the ReBuilT method for the first whole methylome analysis of the highly AT-rich genome of Plasmodium berghei. Side-by-side comparison to a commercial protocol involving amplification demonstrates a substantial improvement in uniformity of coverage and reduction of sequence context bias. Our method will be widely applicable for quantitative methylation analysis, even for technically challenging genomes, and where limited sample DNA is available.
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.