ArticleBMC biotechnology2019
Quantitative assessment of LASSO probe assembly and long-read multiplexed cloning.
Article in BMC biotechnology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Massively parallel DNA target capture using long adapter single stranded oligonucleotide (LASSO) probes assembled through a novel DNA recombinase mediated methodology.Biotechnology journal · 2022Article
- Assembly of Long-Adapter Single-Strand Oligonucleotide (LASSO) Probes for Massively Parallel Capture of Kilobase Size DNA Targets.Current protocols · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLong Adapter Single-Stranded Oligonucleotide (LASSO) probes were developed as a novel tool for massively parallel cloning of kilobase-long genomic DNA sequences. LASSO dramatically improves the capture length limit of current DNA padlock probe technology from approximately 150 bps to several kbps. High-throughput LASSO capture involves the parallel assembly of thousands of probes. However, malformed probes are indiscernible from properly formed probes using gel electrophoretic techniques. Therefore, we used next-generation sequencing (NGS) to assess the efficiency of LASSO probe assembly and how it relates to the nature of DNA capture and amplification. Additionally, we introduce a simplified single target LASSO protocol using classic molecular biology techniques for qualitative and quantitative assessment of probe specificity.
resultsA LASSO probe library targeting 3164 unique E. coli ORFs was assembled using two different probe assembly reaction conditions with a 40-fold difference in DNA concentration. Unique probe sequences are located within the first 50 bps of the 5' and 3' ends, therefore we used paired-end NGS to assess probe library quality. Properly mapped read pairs, representing correctly formed probes, accounted for 10.81 and 0.65% of total reads, corresponding to ~ 80% and ~ 20% coverage of the total probe library for the lower and higher DNA concentration conditions, respectively. Subsequently, we used single-end NGS to correlate probe assembly efficiency and capture quality. Significant enrichment of LASSO targets over non-targets was only observed for captures done using probes assembled with a lower DNA concentration. Additionally, semi-quantitative polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis revealed a ~ 10-fold signal-to-noise ratio of LASSO capture in a simplified system.
conclusionsThese results suggest that LASSO probe coverage for target sequences is more predictive of successful capture than probe assembly depth-enrichment. Concomitantly, these results demonstrate that DNA concentration at a critical step in the probe assembly reaction significantly impacts probe formation. Additionally, we show that a simplified LASSO capture protocol coupled to PAGE (polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis) is highly specific and more amenable to small-scale LASSO approaches, such as screening novel probes and templates.
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.