↓ Skip to main content

A mutant screening method by critical annealing temperature-PCR for site-directed mutagenesis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Biotechnology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A mutant screening method by critical annealing temperature-PCR for site-directed mutagenesis
Published in
BMC Biotechnology, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6750-13-21
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ying Liu, Ting Wu, Jian Song, Xuelian Chen, Yu Zhang, Yu Wan

Abstract

Distinguishing desired mutants from parental templates and undesired mutants is a problem not well solved in Quikchange™ mutagenesis. Although Dpn I digestion can eliminate methylated parental (WT) DNA, the efficiency is not satisfying due to the existence of hemi-methylated DNA in the PCR products, which is resistant to Dpn I. The present study designed a novel critical annealing temperature (T(c))-PCR to replace Dpn I digestion for more perfect mutant distinguishing, in which part-overlapping primers containing mutation(s) were used to reduce initial concentration of template DNA in mutagenic PCR. A T(c)-PCR with the same mutagenic primers was performed without Dpn I digestion. The T(c) for each pair of the primers was identified by gradient PCR. The relationship between PCR-identified T(c) and T(m) of the primers was analyzed and modeled with correlation and regression.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 3%
China 1 3%
Unknown 29 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 19%
Researcher 6 19%
Student > Bachelor 5 16%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 3 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 26%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 2 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 02 April 2013.
All research outputs
#812,149
of 4,507,211 outputs
Outputs from BMC Biotechnology
#125
of 377 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,326
of 89,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Biotechnology
#1
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 377 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
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 89,268 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.