↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of Multiple Methods for Determination of FCGR3A/B Genomic Copy Numbers in HapMap Asian Populations with Two Public Databases

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
Comparison of Multiple Methods for Determination of FCGR3A/B Genomic Copy Numbers in HapMap Asian Populations with Two Public Databases
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2016.00220
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuan-yuan Qi, Xu-jie Zhou, Ding-fang Bu, Ping Hou, Ji-cheng Lv, Hong Zhang

Abstract

Low FCGR3 copy numbers (CNs) has been associated with susceptibility to several systemic autoimmune diseases. However, inconsistent associations were reported and errors caused by shaky methods were suggested to be the major causes. In large scale case control association studies, robust copy number determination method is thus warranted, which was the main focus of the current study. In the present study, FCGR3 CNs of 90 HapMap Asians were firstly checked using four assays including paralog ratio test combined with restriction enzyme digest variant ratio (PRT-REDVR), real-time quantitative (qPCR) using TaqMan assay, real-time qPCR using SYBR Green dye and short tenden repeat (STR). To improve the comparison precision reproductively, the results were compared with those from recently released sequencing data from 1000 genomes project as well as whole-genome tiling BAC array data. The tendencies of inconsistent samples by these methods were also characterized. Refined in-home TaqMan qPCR assay showed the highest correlation with array-CGH results (r = 0.726, p < 0.001) and the highest concordant rate with 1000 genome sequencing data (FCGR3A 91.76%, FCGR3B 85.88%, and FCGR3 81.18%). For samples with copy number variations, comprehensive analysis of multiple methods was required in order to improve detection accuracy. All these method were prone to detect copy number to be higher than that from direct sequencing. All the four PCR based CN determination methods (qPCR using TaqMan probes or SYBR Green, PRT, STR) were prone to higher estimation errors and thus may lead to artificial associations in large-scale case-control association studies. But different to previous reports, we observed that properly refined TaqMan qPCR assay was not inferior to or even more accurate than PRT when using sequencing data as the reference.

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 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 27%
Researcher 1 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 9%
Unknown 5 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 27%
Unknown 5 45%
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 26 December 2016.
All research outputs
#18,504,575
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#7,083
of 11,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#309,773
of 420,008 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#32
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,961 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 420,008 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.