Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9383279›Full record

ArticleMammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society1997

Simulation of the distribution of parental strains' genomes in RC strains of mice.

C J Moen, H J Stoffers, A A Hart, H V Westerhoff, P Demant

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

C J MoenDivision of Molecular Genetics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
H J Stoffers
A A Hart
H V Westerhoff
P Demant

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recombinant Congenic strains (RC strains) were developed to facilitate mapping of genes influencing complex traits controlled by multiple genes. They were produced by inbreeding of the progeny derived from a second backcross from a common 'donor' inbred strain to a common 'background' inbred strain. Each RC strain contains a random subset of approximately 12.5% of genes from the donor strain and 87.5% of genes from the background strain. In this way the genetic control of a complex disease may be dissected into its individual components. We simulated the production of the RC strains to study to what extent they have to be characterized in order to obtain sufficient information about the distribution of the parental strains' genomes in these strains and to acquire insight into parameters influencing their effectiveness in mapping quantitative trait loci (QTLs). The donor strain genome in the RC strains is fragmented into many segments. Genetic characterization of these strains with one polymorphic marker per 3.3 centiMorgans (cM) is needed to detect 95% of the donor strain genome. The probability of a donor strain segment being located entirely in between two markers of background strain origin that are 3 cM apart (and hence escaping detection) is 0.003. Although the donor strain genome in the RC strains is split into many segments, the largest part still occurs in relatively long stretches that are mostly concentrated in fewer than 13 autosomes, the median being 9 autosomes. Thus, in mapping QTLs, the use of RC strains facilitates the detection of linkage.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationGenomeModels, GeneticAnimalsChromosome MappingCrosses, GeneticCrossing Over, GeneticFemaleGenetic LinkageGenetic MarkersMaleMiceMice, Inbred BALB CMice, Inbred C3HMice, Inbred StrainsGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID9383279

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.