Evidence map›Paper›PMID 7912438›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America1994

"RFLP subtraction": a method for making libraries of polymorphic markers.

M Rosenberg, M Przybylska, D Straus

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. NotI subtraction and NotI-specific microarrays to detect copy number and methylation changes in whole genomes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2002
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cytological and molecular characterization of oat x maize partial hybrids.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 1996
    Article
  11. From mutation mapping to phenotype cloning.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 1995
    Review
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

3 authors.

M RosenbergBiology Department, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA 02254-9110.
M Przybylska
D Straus

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We developed a method, "RFLP subtraction," that isolates large numbers of unique sequence restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs) in a single experiment. The technique purifies small restriction fragments from one genome containing sequences that reside on large fragments in a related genome. We first isolate samples containing the small restriction fragments from two polymorphic strains. Subtractive hybridization then removes the fragments that are present in both samples. The remaining sequences are RFLPs: they occur on small fragments in one strain but not in the other. Here we use RFLP subtraction to make a library of hundreds of unique sequence RFLPs from two inbred mouse strains. We analyze and map a subset of the RFLPs and show that the genetic linkage of these markers can be rapidly determined by an efficient dot blot mapping technique. Several other potential applications of RFLP subtraction, including isolating region specific markers, are discussed.

Indexed as

Gene LibraryGenetic TechniquesPolymorphism, GeneticPolymorphism, Restriction Fragment LengthAllelesAnimalsBase SequenceCloning, MolecularDeoxyribonuclease HindIIIDNAGenetic MarkersGenomeLod ScoreMiceMice, Inbred StrainsMolecular Sequence DataDeoxyribonuclease HindIIIDNAGenetic MarkersOligodeoxyribonucleotides

Identifiers

PMID7912438
PMCPMC44148

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.