Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27496052›Full record

ArticleBMC cell biology2016

Aneuploidy screening of embryonic stem cell clones by metaphase karyotyping and droplet digital polymerase chain reaction.

Gemma F Codner, Loic Lindner, Adam Caulder, Marie Wattenhofer-Donzé, Adam Radage, Annelyse Mertz, Benjamin Eisenmann, Joffrey Mianné, Edward P Evans, Colin V Beechey and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cell biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Gemma F CodnerThe Mary Lyon Centre, Medical Research Council Harwell Institute, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, OX11 0RD, Oxon, UK.
Loic LindnerPHENOMIN, Institut Clinique de la Souris, ICS; CNRS, INSERM, Université de Strasbourg, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, Strasbourg, 67404, France.
Adam CaulderThe Mary Lyon Centre, Medical Research Council Harwell Institute, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, OX11 0RD, Oxon, UK.
Marie Wattenhofer-DonzéPHENOMIN, Institut Clinique de la Souris, ICS; CNRS, INSERM, Université de Strasbourg, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, Strasbourg, 67404, France.
Adam RadageThe Mary Lyon Centre, Medical Research Council Harwell Institute, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, OX11 0RD, Oxon, UK.
Annelyse MertzPHENOMIN, Institut Clinique de la Souris, ICS; CNRS, INSERM, Université de Strasbourg, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, Strasbourg, 67404, France.
Benjamin EisenmannPHENOMIN, Institut Clinique de la Souris, ICS; CNRS, INSERM, Université de Strasbourg, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, Strasbourg, 67404, France.
Joffrey MiannéPHENOMIN, Institut Clinique de la Souris, ICS; CNRS, INSERM, Université de Strasbourg, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, Strasbourg, 67404, France.
Edward P EvansThe Mary Lyon Centre, Medical Research Council Harwell Institute, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, OX11 0RD, Oxon, UK.
Colin V BeecheyThe Mary Lyon Centre, Medical Research Council Harwell Institute, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, OX11 0RD, Oxon, UK.
Martin D FrayThe Mary Lyon Centre, Medical Research Council Harwell Institute, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, OX11 0RD, Oxon, UK.
Marie-Christine BirlingPHENOMIN, Institut Clinique de la Souris, ICS; CNRS, INSERM, Université de Strasbourg, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, Strasbourg, 67404, France.
Yann HéraultPHENOMIN, Institut Clinique de la Souris, ICS; CNRS, INSERM, Université de Strasbourg, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, Strasbourg, 67404, France.
Guillaume PavlovicPHENOMIN, Institut Clinique de la Souris, ICS; CNRS, INSERM, Université de Strasbourg, Illkirch-Graffenstaden, Strasbourg, 67404, France. pavlovic@igbmc.fr.
Lydia TeboulThe Mary Lyon Centre, Medical Research Council Harwell Institute, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, OX11 0RD, Oxon, UK. l.teboul@har.mrc.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-2789-8637
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRMary Lyon Centre at MRC Harwell · GB

Funding

CRSPR II Supplement: Consortium for the production and cryopreservation of knockout miceU42OD011174 · OD · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI BEAUDET, ARTHUR L. · 2012 to 2015
$17.7M
Medical Research Council MC_UP_1502/3NIH HHS U42 OD011174Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundKaryotypic integrity is essential for the successful germline transmission of alleles mutated in embryonic stem (ES) cells. Classical methods for the identification of aneuploidy involve cytological analyses that are both time consuming and require rare expertise to identify mouse chromosomes.

resultsAs part of the International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium, we gathered data from over 1,500 ES cell clones and found that the germline transmission (GLT) efficiency of clones is compromised when over 50 % of cells harbour chromosome number abnormalities. In JM8 cells, chromosomes 1, 8, 11 or Y displayed copy number variation most frequently, whilst the remainder generally remain unchanged. We developed protocols employing droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) to accurately quantify the copy number of these four chromosomes, allowing efficient triage of ES clones prior to microinjection. We verified that assessments of aneuploidy, and thus decisions regarding the suitability of clones for microinjection, were concordant between classical cytological and ddPCR-based methods. Finally, we improved the method to include assay multiplexing so that two unstable chromosomes are counted simultaneously (and independently) in one reaction, to enhance throughput and further reduce the cost.

conclusionWe validated a PCR-based method as an alternative to classical karyotype analysis. This technique enables laboratories that are non-specialist, or work with large numbers of clones, to precisely screen ES cells for the most common aneuploidies prior to microinjection to ensure the highest level of germline transmission potential. The application of this method allows early exclusion of aneuploid ES cell clones in the ES cell to mouse conversion process, thus improving the chances of obtaining germline transmission and reducing the number of animals used in failed microinjection attempts. This method can be applied to any other experiments that require accurate analysis of the genome for copy number variation (CNV).

Indexed as

AneuploidyMetaphaseAnimalsCells, CulturedChromosomes, MammalianDNA Copy Number VariationsGerm CellsKaryotypingMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMouse Embryonic Stem CellsPolymerase Chain ReactionAneuploidyCell cultureChromosome numberDroplet digital PCREmbryonic stem cellsKaryotypeMultiplex assay

Identifiers

PMID27496052
PMCPMC4974727
OpenAlexW2478088043

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.