4.8 Article

High-resolution genome-wide cytosine methylation profiling with simultaneous copy number analysis and optimization for limited cell numbers

期刊

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
卷 37, 期 12, 页码 3829-3839

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkp260

关键词

-

资金

  1. Einstein Center for Epigenomics
  2. Bioinformatics Shared Resource and the Genomics Core Facility
  3. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) [R01 HG004401]
  4. NHLBI [R01 HL082946]
  5. NIA [P01 AG027734, R01 AG18728]
  6. NIGMS [T32 GM007288]
  7. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  8. Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Translational Research Award
  9. Hershaft Foundation
  10. Leukemia and Lymphoma Society
  11. NHGRI [R01 HG004401]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many genome-wide assays involve the generation of a subset (or representation) of the genome following restriction enzyme digestion. The use of enzymes sensitive to cytosine methylation allows high-throughput analysis of this epigenetic regulatory process. We show that the use of a dual-adapter approach allows us to generate genomic representations that includes fragments of < 200bp in size, previously not possible when using the standard approach of using a single adapter. By expanding the representation to smaller fragments using HpaII or MspI, we increase the representation by these isoschizomers to more than 1.32 million loci in the human genome, representing 98.5% of CpG islands and 91.1% of refSeq promoters. This advance allows the development of a new, high-resolution version of our HpaII-tiny fragment Enrichment by Ligation-mediated PCR (HELP) assay to study cytosine methylation. We also show that the MspI representation generates information about copy-number variation, that the assay can be used on as little as 10ng of DNA and that massively parallel sequencing can be used as an alternative to microarrays to read the output of the assay, making this a powerful discovery platform for studies of genomic and epigenomic abnormalities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据