↓ Skip to main content

Performances of Different Fragment Sizes for Reduced Representation Bisulfite Sequencing in Pigs

Overview of attention for article published in Biological Procedures Online, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Performances of Different Fragment Sizes for Reduced Representation Bisulfite Sequencing in Pigs
Published in
Biological Procedures Online, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12575-017-0054-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiao-Long Yuan, Zhe Zhang, Rong-Yang Pan, Ning Gao, Xi Deng, Bin Li, Hao Zhang, Per Torp Sangild, Jia-Qi Li

Abstract

Reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS) has been widely used to profile genome-scale DNA methylation in mammalian genomes. However, the applications and technical performances of RRBS with different fragment sizes have not been systematically reported in pigs, which serve as one of the important biomedical models for humans. The aims of this study were to evaluate capacities of RRBS libraries with different fragment sizes to characterize the porcine genome. We found that the MspI-digested segments between 40 and 220 bp harbored a high distribution peak at 74 bp, which were highly overlapped with the repetitive elements and might reduce the unique mapping alignment. The RRBS library of 110-220 bp fragment size had the highest unique mapping alignment and the lowest multiple alignment. The cost-effectiveness of the 40-110 bp, 110-220 bp and 40-220 bp fragment sizes might decrease when the dataset size was more than 70, 50 and 110 million reads for these three fragment sizes, respectively. Given a 50-million dataset size, the average sequencing depth of the detected CpG sites in the 110-220 bp fragment size appeared to be deeper than in the 40-110 bp and 40-220 bp fragment sizes, and these detected CpG sties differently located in gene- and CpG island-related regions. In this study, our results demonstrated that selections of fragment sizes could affect the numbers and sequencing depth of detected CpG sites as well as the cost-efficiency. No single solution of RRBS is optimal in all circumstances for investigating genome-scale DNA methylation. This work provides the useful knowledge on designing and executing RRBS for investigating the genome-wide DNA methylation in tissues from pigs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 20%
Professor 1 7%
Lecturer 1 7%
Unknown 5 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 20%
Computer Science 1 7%
Unknown 5 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 June 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Biological Procedures Online
#171
of 192 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,885
of 331,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Procedures Online
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 192 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,588 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.