从RAPD数据计算遗传相似系数:校正由实验条件变化引起的PCR伪影的影响。

W F Lamboy
{"title":"从RAPD数据计算遗传相似系数:校正由实验条件变化引起的PCR伪影的影响。","authors":"W F Lamboy","doi":"10.1101/gr.4.1.38","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The production of informative random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers using PCR and a single primer is often accompanied by the generation of artifactual (noninformative) bands as well. When RAPD data are used to compute genetic similarity coefficients, these artifacts (false positives, false negatives, or both) can cause large biases in the numerical values of the coefficients. As a result, some workers have been reluctant to use RAPD markers in the estimation of genetic similarities. Artifactual bands are of two types: those caused by variation in experimental conditions, and those caused by characteristics of the DNA to be amplified. A procedure is described that allows for correction of the bias caused by the first type of artifact, providing that replicate DNA samples have been extracted, amplified, and scored. The resulting data are used to obtain an estimate of the proportion of false-positive and false-negatives bands. These values are then used to correct the bias in the computed similarity coefficients. Two examples are given, one in which bias correction is critical to the results, and one in which it is less important. The maximum percent bias, computed from the estimated proportions of false positives and false negatives in the RAPD data set, is proposed as a criterion for determining whether bias correction of the similarity coefficients is required or not. Although all reasonable efforts should be made to optimize PCR protocols to eliminate artifactual bands, when this is not possible, the methods described allow RAPD markers to compute genetic similarities reliably and accurately, even when artifactual bands resulting from variation in experimental conditions are present.</p>","PeriodicalId":77315,"journal":{"name":"PCR methods and applications","volume":"4 1","pages":"38-43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"36","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Computing genetic similarity coefficients from RAPD data: correcting for the effects of PCR artifacts caused by variation in experimental conditions.\",\"authors\":\"W F Lamboy\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/gr.4.1.38\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The production of informative random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers using PCR and a single primer is often accompanied by the generation of artifactual (noninformative) bands as well. When RAPD data are used to compute genetic similarity coefficients, these artifacts (false positives, false negatives, or both) can cause large biases in the numerical values of the coefficients. As a result, some workers have been reluctant to use RAPD markers in the estimation of genetic similarities. Artifactual bands are of two types: those caused by variation in experimental conditions, and those caused by characteristics of the DNA to be amplified. A procedure is described that allows for correction of the bias caused by the first type of artifact, providing that replicate DNA samples have been extracted, amplified, and scored. The resulting data are used to obtain an estimate of the proportion of false-positive and false-negatives bands. These values are then used to correct the bias in the computed similarity coefficients. Two examples are given, one in which bias correction is critical to the results, and one in which it is less important. The maximum percent bias, computed from the estimated proportions of false positives and false negatives in the RAPD data set, is proposed as a criterion for determining whether bias correction of the similarity coefficients is required or not. Although all reasonable efforts should be made to optimize PCR protocols to eliminate artifactual bands, when this is not possible, the methods described allow RAPD markers to compute genetic similarities reliably and accurately, even when artifactual bands resulting from variation in experimental conditions are present.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77315,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PCR methods and applications\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"38-43\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1994-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"36\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PCR methods and applications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.4.1.38\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PCR methods and applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.4.1.38","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 36

摘要

使用PCR和单个引物产生信息随机扩增多态性DNA (RAPD)标记通常伴随着人工(非信息)条带的产生。当使用RAPD数据计算遗传相似性系数时,这些伪影(假阳性、假阴性或两者兼而有之)会导致系数数值出现较大偏差。因此,一些工作者一直不愿意使用RAPD标记来估计遗传相似性。人工条带有两种类型:一种是由实验条件的变化引起的,另一种是由待扩增DNA的特征引起的。本文描述了一种程序,该程序允许纠正由第一种伪影引起的偏差,前提是复制DNA样本已被提取、扩增和评分。所得数据用于估计假阳性和假阴性波段的比例。然后使用这些值来纠正计算的相似系数中的偏差。给出了两个例子,其中一个是偏差校正对结果至关重要,另一个则不那么重要。根据RAPD数据集中假阳性和假阴性的估计比例计算的最大百分比偏差,被提出作为确定是否需要对相似系数进行偏差校正的标准。尽管应该尽一切合理的努力来优化PCR方案以消除伪带,但当这是不可能的时候,所描述的方法允许RAPD标记可靠而准确地计算遗传相似性,即使存在由实验条件变化引起的伪带。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Computing genetic similarity coefficients from RAPD data: correcting for the effects of PCR artifacts caused by variation in experimental conditions.

The production of informative random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers using PCR and a single primer is often accompanied by the generation of artifactual (noninformative) bands as well. When RAPD data are used to compute genetic similarity coefficients, these artifacts (false positives, false negatives, or both) can cause large biases in the numerical values of the coefficients. As a result, some workers have been reluctant to use RAPD markers in the estimation of genetic similarities. Artifactual bands are of two types: those caused by variation in experimental conditions, and those caused by characteristics of the DNA to be amplified. A procedure is described that allows for correction of the bias caused by the first type of artifact, providing that replicate DNA samples have been extracted, amplified, and scored. The resulting data are used to obtain an estimate of the proportion of false-positive and false-negatives bands. These values are then used to correct the bias in the computed similarity coefficients. Two examples are given, one in which bias correction is critical to the results, and one in which it is less important. The maximum percent bias, computed from the estimated proportions of false positives and false negatives in the RAPD data set, is proposed as a criterion for determining whether bias correction of the similarity coefficients is required or not. Although all reasonable efforts should be made to optimize PCR protocols to eliminate artifactual bands, when this is not possible, the methods described allow RAPD markers to compute genetic similarities reliably and accurately, even when artifactual bands resulting from variation in experimental conditions are present.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Rapid and sensitive analysis of mRNA polyadenylation states by PCR. Identification of 3'-terminal exons from yeast artificial chromosomes. Quantitative analysis of specific mRNA transcripts using a competitive PCR assay with electrochemiluminescent detection. Batched analysis of genotypes. A one-step coupled amplification and oligonucleotide ligation procedure for multiplex genetic typing.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1