ArticleScientific reports2024
Combination of error-prone PCR (epPCR) and Circular Polymerase Extension Cloning (CPEC) for improving the coverage of random mutagenesis libraries.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep-mutational scanning libraries using Tiled-Region Exchange mutagenesis.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Article
- Article
- Advances in the Directed Evolution of Computer-aided Enzymes.Current topics in medicinal chemistry · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Random mutagenesis, such as error-prone PCR (epPCR), is a technique capable of generating a wide variety of a single gene. However, epPCR can produce a large number of mutated gene variants, posing a challenge in ligating these mutated PCR products into plasmid vectors. Typically, the primers for mutagenic PCRs incorporate artificial restriction enzyme sites compatible with chosen plasmids. Products are cleaved and ligated to linearized plasmids, then recircularized by DNA ligase. However, this cut-and-paste method known as ligation-dependent process cloning (LDCP), has limited efficiency, as the loss of potential mutants is inevitable leading to a significant reduction in the library's breadth. An alternative to LDCP is the circular polymerase extension cloning (CPEC) method. This technique involves a reaction where a high-fidelity DNA polymerase extends the overlapping regions between the insert and vector, forming a circular molecule. In this study, our objective was to compare the traditional cut-and-paste enzymatic method with CPEC in producing a variant library from the gene encoding the red fluorescent protein (DsRed2) obtained by epPCR. Our findings suggest that CPEC can accelerate the cloning process in gene library generation, enabling the acquisition of a greater number of gene variants compared to methods reliant on restriction enzymes.
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.