ArticleTurkish journal of biology = Turk biyoloji dergisi2019
Characterizing microsatellite polymorphisms using assembly-based and mapping-based tools.
Article in Turkish journal of biology = Turk biyoloji dergisi, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microsatellite polymorphism has always been a challenge for genome assembly and sequence alignment due to sequencing errors, short read lengths, and high incidence of polymerase slippage in microsatellite regions. Despite the information they carry being very valuable, microsatellite variations have not gained enough attention to be a routine step in genome sequence analysis pipelines. After the completion of the 1000 Genomes Project, which aimed to establish the most detailed genetic variation catalog for humans, the consortium released only two microsatellite prediction sets generated by two tools. Many other large research efforts have failed to shed light on microsatellite variations. We evaluated the performance of three different local assembly methods on three different experimental settings, focusing on genotype-based performance, coverage impact, and preprocessing including flanking regions. All these experiments supported our initial expectations on assembly. We also demonstrate that overlap-layout-consensus (OLC)-basedassembly methods show higher sensitivity to microsatellite variant calling when compared to a de Bruijn graph-based approach. We conclude that assembly with OLC is the better method for genotyping microsatellites. Our pipeline is available at https://github.com/gulfemd/STRAssembly.
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.