↓ Skip to main content

C. elegans Mutant Identification with a One-Step Whole-Genome-Sequencing and SNP Mapping Strategy

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
235 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
423 Mendeley
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
C. elegans Mutant Identification with a One-Step Whole-Genome-Sequencing and SNP Mapping Strategy
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2010
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0015435
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Doitsidou, Richard J. Poole, Sumeet Sarin, Henry Bigelow, Oliver Hobert

Abstract

Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is becoming a fast and cost-effective method to pinpoint molecular lesions in mutagenized genetic model systems, such as Caenorhabditis elegans. As mutagenized strains contain a significant mutational load, it is often still necessary to map mutations to a chromosomal interval to elucidate which of the WGS-identified sequence variants is the phenotype-causing one. We describe here our experience in setting up and testing a simple strategy that incorporates a rapid SNP-based mapping step into the WGS procedure. In this strategy, a mutant retrieved from a genetic screen is crossed with a polymorphic C. elegans strain, individual F2 progeny from this cross is selected for the mutant phenotype, the progeny of these F2 animals are pooled and then whole-genome-sequenced. The density of polymorphic SNP markers is decreased in the region of the phenotype-causing sequence variant and therefore enables its identification in the WGS data. As a proof of principle, we use this strategy to identify the molecular lesion in a mutant strain that produces an excess of dopaminergic neurons. We find that the molecular lesion resides in the Pax-6/Eyeless ortholog vab-3. The strategy described here will further reduce the time between mutant isolation and identification of the molecular lesion.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 423 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 14 3%
Germany 3 <1%
Austria 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 398 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 123 29%
Researcher 77 18%
Student > Master 44 10%
Student > Bachelor 40 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 23 5%
Other 69 16%
Unknown 47 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 208 49%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 115 27%
Neuroscience 24 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 1%
Other 14 3%
Unknown 50 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 21 December 2010.
All research outputs
#6,377,613
of 22,660,862 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#76,338
of 193,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,536
of 100,591 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#504
of 1,002 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,660,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 100,591 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,002 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.