| Literature DB >> 18837997 |
Aurélie Bonin1, Margot Paris, Laurence Després, Guillaume Tetreau, Jean-Philippe David, Andrzej Kilian.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For most organisms, developing hundreds of genetic markers spanning the whole genome still requires excessive if not unrealistic efforts. In this context, there is an obvious need for methodologies allowing the low-cost, fast and high-throughput genotyping of virtually any species, such as the Diversity Arrays Technology (DArT). One of the crucial steps of the DArT technique is the genome complexity reduction, which allows obtaining a genomic representation characteristic of the studied DNA sample and necessary for subsequent genotyping. In this article, using the mosquito Aedes aegypti as a study model, we describe a new genome complexity reduction method taking advantage of the abundance of miniature inverted repeat transposable elements (MITEs) in the genome of this species.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18837997 PMCID: PMC2579443 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-9-459
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genomics ISSN: 1471-2164 Impact factor: 3.969
Figure 1Schematic illustration of the DArT protocol. (A) Principle of the MITE-based genome complexity reduction method. Genomic DNA is digested by restriction enzyme Bsp1286I, and Bsp1286I adaptors are ligated to the generated overhangs. Then two rounds of PCR amplifications are performed using two primers: one annealing to Bsp1286I adaptors (Bsp1286I primer), and one complementary to a conserved sequence motif of the Pony element. For the most part, the resulting genomic representations include fragments with the Bsp1286I restriction site on one extremity and the Pony motif on the other one, because the PCR conditions are adjusted to preferably amplify this particular type of fragments. (B) Principle of the polymorphism detection on DArT microarrays. Genomic representations of each sample are hybridized against a library containing all fragments spotted on a slide. When a fragment is missing in one representation, it will not hybridize to the corresponding fragment on the slide. In this example, monomorphic fragments present in both representations are scored as '-' while polymorphic fragments present or absent in one representation are scored as '1' or '0', respectively.
Adaptor and primer sequences used for preparation of genomic representations and library construction
| • Forward strand: equimolar mix of CATAGGTGTCCACAGTCGGTCTGCA CATAGGTGTCCACAGTCGGTCTGCT CATAGGTGTCCACAGTCGGTCTGCC | AGGTGTCCACAGTCGGTCT | |
| • Reverse strand GACCGACTGTGGAC | ||
| • Forward strand: equimolar mix of CTGAGTAGTGCCAGAACGGTCTGCA CTGAGTAGTGCCAGAACGGTCTGCC CTGAGTAGTGCCAGAACGGTCTGCT | CTGAGTAGTGCCAGAACGGTC | |
| • Reverse strand GACCGTTCTGGCA | ||
| - | ||
| CGNAATNTGARYCAAAACGGTA | ||
| GGANGCGTATTCTTYACCCAC | ||
Figure 2Relationships between different quality parameters in the MITE library. After discarding the most unreliable markers (discordance > 5%), remaining markers were sorted out by decreasing P values and grouped in bins with an increment of 50 markers between two successive bins. Within-group average P was plotted against within-group average discordance (A) and within-group average Call Rate (B).
Figure 3Principal coordinate analysis. A principal coordinate analysis (PCO) was carried out with the working dataset (476 DArT markers), and for each Aedes aegypti individual, the coordinate obtained for the first axis of the PCO was plotted against that obtained for the second axis.
Indices of genetic diversity within each mosquito strain
| 0.350 (0.196 – 0.643) | 0.331 (0.110 – 0.590) | |
| 0.451 | 0.275 | |
| 0.341 | 0.207 | |
| 94.1 | 58.6 | |