Literature DB >> 11680712

Microsatellite allele sizing: difference between automated capillary electrophoresis and manual technique.

F Delmotte1, N Leterme, J C Simon.   

Abstract

By comparing data collected with different automated sequencers and a manual technique (fragment separation in a silver-stained polyacrylamide gel), we found strong discrepancies in allele size of microsatellite loci. To quantify the sizing bias generated by automated capillary electrophoresis, we typed 51 alleles at seven loci andfound that differences between actual (manual) and called (automated) sizing were inversely related to locus size. This result seems independent of the fluorescent dye but might be due to different migration patterns of the size standard and the microsatellite loci. Thus, it is essential to distinguish between actual (that can only be confirmed by sequencing) and called (obtained with automated sequencer) allele sizes. To enable the comparison of data collected by different laboratories on different instruments, the greatest attention should be paid to material and protocol descriptions used for allele sizing, and reference standard DNA genotypes should be shared between collaborating laboratories. Without these precautions, scoring errors in allele size might result in important misleading conclusions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11680712

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biotechniques        ISSN: 0736-6205            Impact factor:   1.993


  5 in total

1.  Microsatellite standardization and evaluation of genotyping error in a large multi-partner research programme for conservation of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.).

Authors:  J S Ellis; J Gilbey; A Armstrong; T Balstad; E Cauwelier; C Cherbonnel; S Consuegra; J Coughlan; T F Cross; W Crozier; E Dillane; D Ensing; C García de Leániz; E García-Vázquez; A M Griffiths; K Hindar; S Hjorleifsdottir; D Knox; G Machado-Schiaffino; P McGinnity; D Meldrup; E E Nielsen; K Olafsson; C R Primmer; P Prodohl; L Stradmeyer; J-P Vähä; E Verspoor; V Wennevik; J R Stevens
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 1.082

2.  A cautionary tale: Lack of consistency in allele sizes between two laboratories for a published multilocus microsatellite typing system.

Authors:  Alessandro C Pasqualotto; David W Denning; Michael J Anderson
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2006-12-13       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Multilocus fragment typing and genetic structure of Cryptosporidium parvum Isolates from diarrheic preweaned calves in Spain.

Authors:  Joaquín Quílez; Claudia Vergara-Castiblanco; Luis Monteagudo; Emilio Del Cacho; Caridad Sánchez-Acedo
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2011-09-09       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  A novel method of microsatellite genotyping-by-sequencing using individual combinatorial barcoding.

Authors:  Salla Vartia; José L Villanueva-Cañas; John Finarelli; Edward D Farrell; Patrick C Collins; Graham M Hughes; Jeanette E L Carlsson; David T Gauthier; Philip McGinnity; Thomas F Cross; Richard D FitzGerald; Luca Mirimin; Fiona Crispie; Paul D Cotter; Jens Carlsson
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 2.963

5.  High-Throughput Sequencing Strategy for Microsatellite Genotyping Using Neotropical Fish as a Model.

Authors:  Juliana S M Pimentel; Anderson O Carmo; Izinara C Rosse; Ana P V Martins; Sandra Ludwig; Susanne Facchin; Adriana H Pereira; Pedro F P Brandão-Dias; Nazaré L Abreu; Evanguedes Kalapothakis
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 4.599

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.