Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38913302›Full record

ReviewMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2024

Methods of Detection and Mechanisms of Origin of Complex Structural Genome Variations.

Martin Poot

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Martin PootDepartment of Human Genetics, University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Based on classical karyotyping, structural genome variations (SVs) have generally been considered to be either "simple" (with one or two breakpoints) or "complex" (with more than two breakpoints). Studying the breakpoints of SVs at nucleotide resolution revealed additional, subtle structural variations, such that even "simple" SVs turned out to be "complex." Genome-wide sequencing methods, such as fosmid and paired-end mapping, short-read and long-read whole genome sequencing, and single-molecule optical mapping, also indicated that the number of SVs per individual was considerably larger than expected from karyotyping and high-resolution chromosomal array-based studies. Interestingly, SVs were detected in studies of cohorts of individuals without clinical phenotypes. The common denominator of all SVs appears to be a failure to accurately repair DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) or to halt cell cycle progression if DSBs persist. This review discusses the various DSB response mechanisms during the mitotic cell cycle and during meiosis and their regulation. Emphasis is given to the molecular mechanisms involved in the formation of translocations, deletions, duplications, and inversions during or shortly after meiosis I. Recently, CRISPR-Cas9 studies have provided unexpected insights into the formation of translocations and chromothripsis by both breakage-fusion-bridge and micronucleus-dependent mechanisms.

Indexed as

DNA Breaks, Double-StrandedGenomic Structural VariationAnimalsCRISPR-Cas SystemsHumansKaryotypingMeiosisDNA double-strand breaks (DSBs)DSB repairPhenotypic effectsVariation complexityWhole genome sequencing (WGS)

Identifiers

PMID38913302

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.