Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35103959›Full record

ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2022

Generating Sequencing-Based DNA Methylation Maps from Low DNA Input Samples.

Suzan Al Momani, Euan J Rodger, Peter A Stockwell, Michael R Eccles, Aniruddha Chatterjee

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Suzan Al MomaniDepartment of Pathology, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Euan J RodgerDepartment of Pathology, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Peter A StockwellDepartment of Pathology, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Michael R EcclesDepartment of Pathology, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Aniruddha ChatterjeeDepartment of Pathology, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. aniruddha.chatterjee@otago.ac.nz.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS) is a technique used for assessing genome-wide DNA methylation patterns in eukaryotes. RRBS was introduced to focus on CpG-rich regions that are likely to be of most interest for epigenetic regulation, such as gene promoters and enhancer sequence elements (Meissner et al., Nature 454:766-770, 2008). This "reduced representation" lowers the cost of sequencing and also gives increased depth of coverage, facilitating the resolution of more subtle changes in methylation levels. Here, we describe a modified RRBS sequencing (RRBS-seq) library preparation. Our protocol is optimized for generating single base-resolution libraries when low input DNA is a concern (10-100 ng). Our protocol includes steps to optimize library preparation, such as using deparaffinization solution (when formalin-fixed material is used), and a replacement of gel size-selection with sample purification beads. The described protocol can be accomplished in 3 days and has been successfully applied to tissues or cells from different organisms, including formalin-fixed tissues, to yield robust and reproducible results.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationEpigenesis, GeneticCpG IslandsDNASequence Analysis, DNASulfitesDNASulfitesCpG islandDMAPDNA methylationEpigeneticsFFPEMethylomeMultiplexedReduced representation bisulfite sequencing

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.