↓ Skip to main content

Decoding a Substantial Set of Samples in Parallel by Massive Sequencing

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2011
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 (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
4 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
Decoding a Substantial Set of Samples in Parallel by Massive Sequencing
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0017785
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mårten Neiman, Sverker Lundin, Peter Savolainen, Afshin Ahmadian

Abstract

There has been a dramatic increase of throughput of sequenced bases in the last years but sequencing a multitude of samples in parallel has not yet developed equally. Here we present a novel strategy where the combination of two tags is used to link sequencing reads back to their origins from a pool of samples. By incorporating the tags in two steps sample-handling complexity is lowered by nearly 100 times compared to conventional indexing protocols. In addition, the method described here enables accurate identification and typing of thousands of samples in parallel. In this study the system was designed to test 4992 samples using only 122 tags. To prove the concept of the two-tagging method, the highly polymorphic 2(nd) exon of DLA-DRB1 in dogs and wolves was sequenced using the 454 GS FLX Titanium Chemistry. By requiring a minimum sequence depth of 20 reads per sample, 94% of the successfully amplified samples were genotyped. In addition, the method allowed digital detection of chimeric fragments. These results demonstrate that it is possible to sequence thousands of samples in parallel without complex pooling patterns or primer combinations. Furthermore, the method is highly scalable as only a limited number of additional tags leads to substantial increase of the sample size.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 6%
Spain 3 3%
Canada 2 2%
France 1 <1%
Pakistan 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 83 81%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 36 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 21%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 8%
Student > Master 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 8 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 70 69%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 10 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 08 March 2022.
All research outputs
#4,828,844
of 23,292,144 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#67,995
of 199,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,461
of 109,815 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#466
of 1,391 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,292,144 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 199,063 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 109,815 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,391 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.