PhytophthoraV1, Main, Exploration, bibRecord, 001773

Comparison of three microsatellite analysis methods for detecting genetic diversity in Phytophthora sojae (Stramenopila: Oomycete).

Identifieur interne : 001773 ( Main/Exploration ); précédent : 001772; suivant : 001774

Comparison of three microsatellite analysis methods for detecting genetic diversity in Phytophthora sojae (Stramenopila: Oomycete).

Auteurs : Silvina Stewart [États-Unis] ; Damitha Wickramasinghe ; Anne E. Dorrance ; Alison E. Robertson

Source :

Biotechnology letters [ 1573-6776 ] ; 2011.

RBID : pubmed:21744147

Descripteurs français

KwdFr :
- Allèles (MeSH), Génotype (MeSH), Phytophthora (classification), Phytophthora (génétique), Répétitions microsatellites (MeSH), Typage moléculaire (méthodes), Variation génétique (MeSH), Électrophorèse capillaire (méthodes).
MESH :
- génétique : Phytophthora.
- méthodes : Typage moléculaire, Électrophorèse capillaire.
- classification : Allèles, Génotype, Phytophthora, Répétitions microsatellites, Variation génétique.

English descriptors

KwdEn :
- Alleles (MeSH), Electrophoresis, Capillary (methods), Genetic Variation (MeSH), Genotype (MeSH), Microsatellite Repeats (MeSH), Molecular Typing (methods), Phytophthora (classification), Phytophthora (genetics).
MESH :
- classification : Phytophthora.
- genetics : Phytophthora.
- methods : Electrophoresis, Capillary, Molecular Typing.
- Alleles, Genetic Variation, Genotype, Microsatellite Repeats.

Abstract

Analysis of an organism's genetic diversity requires a method that gives reliable, reproducible results. Microsatellites are robust markers, however, detection of allele sizes can be difficult with some systems as well as consistency among laboratories. In this study, our two laboratories used 219 isolates of Phytophthora sojae to compare three microsatellite methods. Two capillary electrophoresis methods, the Applied Biosystems 3730 Genetic Analyzer and the CEQ 8000 Genetic Analysis system, detected an average of 2.4-fold more alleles compared to gel electrophoresis with a mean of 8.8 and 3.6 alleles per locus using capillary and gel methods, respectively. The two capillary methods were comparable, although allele sizes differed consistently by an average of 3.2 bp across isolates. Differences between capillary methods could be overcome if reference standard DNA genotypes are shared between collaborating laboratories.

DOI: 10.1007/s10529-011-0682-9
PubMed: 21744147
PubMed Central: PMC3181407

Affiliations:

Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)

to stream Main, to step Corpus: 001669
to stream Main, to step Curation: 001669

Le document en format XML

<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Comparison of three microsatellite analysis methods for detecting genetic diversity in Phytophthora sojae (Stramenopila: Oomycete).</title>
<author><name sortKey="Stewart, Silvina" sort="Stewart, Silvina" uniqKey="Stewart S" first="Silvina" last="Stewart">Silvina Stewart</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="4"><nlm:affiliation>Department of Plant Pathology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA. silvina@iastate.edu</nlm:affiliation>
<country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Department of Plant Pathology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011</wicri:regionArea>
<placeName><region type="state">Iowa</region>
<settlement type="city">Ames (Iowa)</settlement>
</placeName>
<orgName type="university">Université d'État de l'Iowa</orgName>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Wickramasinghe, Damitha" sort="Wickramasinghe, Damitha" uniqKey="Wickramasinghe D" first="Damitha" last="Wickramasinghe">Damitha Wickramasinghe</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Dorrance, Anne E" sort="Dorrance, Anne E" uniqKey="Dorrance A" first="Anne E" last="Dorrance">Anne E. Dorrance</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Robertson, Alison E" sort="Robertson, Alison E" uniqKey="Robertson A" first="Alison E" last="Robertson">Alison E. Robertson</name>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno>
<date when="2011">2011</date>
<idno type="RBID">pubmed:21744147</idno>
<idno type="pmid">21744147</idno>
<idno type="doi">10.1007/s10529-011-0682-9</idno>
<idno type="pmc">PMC3181407</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Corpus">001669</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Main" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">001669</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Curation">001669</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Main" wicri:step="Curation">001669</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Exploration">001669</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Comparison of three microsatellite analysis methods for detecting genetic diversity in Phytophthora sojae (Stramenopila: Oomycete).</title>
<author><name sortKey="Stewart, Silvina" sort="Stewart, Silvina" uniqKey="Stewart S" first="Silvina" last="Stewart">Silvina Stewart</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="4"><nlm:affiliation>Department of Plant Pathology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA. silvina@iastate.edu</nlm:affiliation>
<country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Department of Plant Pathology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011</wicri:regionArea>
<placeName><region type="state">Iowa</region>
<settlement type="city">Ames (Iowa)</settlement>
</placeName>
<orgName type="university">Université d'État de l'Iowa</orgName>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Wickramasinghe, Damitha" sort="Wickramasinghe, Damitha" uniqKey="Wickramasinghe D" first="Damitha" last="Wickramasinghe">Damitha Wickramasinghe</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Dorrance, Anne E" sort="Dorrance, Anne E" uniqKey="Dorrance A" first="Anne E" last="Dorrance">Anne E. Dorrance</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Robertson, Alison E" sort="Robertson, Alison E" uniqKey="Robertson A" first="Alison E" last="Robertson">Alison E. Robertson</name>
</author>
</analytic>
<series><title level="j">Biotechnology letters</title>
<idno type="eISSN">1573-6776</idno>
<imprint><date when="2011" type="published">2011</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Alleles (MeSH)</term>
<term>Electrophoresis, Capillary (methods)</term>
<term>Genetic Variation (MeSH)</term>
<term>Genotype (MeSH)</term>
<term>Microsatellite Repeats (MeSH)</term>
<term>Molecular Typing (methods)</term>
<term>Phytophthora (classification)</term>
<term>Phytophthora (genetics)</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="KwdFr" xml:lang="fr"><term>Allèles (MeSH)</term>
<term>Génotype (MeSH)</term>
<term>Phytophthora (classification)</term>
<term>Phytophthora (génétique)</term>
<term>Répétitions microsatellites (MeSH)</term>
<term>Typage moléculaire (méthodes)</term>
<term>Variation génétique (MeSH)</term>
<term>Électrophorèse capillaire (méthodes)</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="classification" xml:lang="en"><term>Phytophthora</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="genetics" xml:lang="en"><term>Phytophthora</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="génétique" xml:lang="fr"><term>Phytophthora</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="methods" xml:lang="en"><term>Electrophoresis, Capillary</term>
<term>Molecular Typing</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="méthodes" xml:lang="fr"><term>Typage moléculaire</term>
<term>Électrophorèse capillaire</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Alleles</term>
<term>Genetic Variation</term>
<term>Genotype</term>
<term>Microsatellite Repeats</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="classification" xml:lang="fr"><term>Allèles</term>
<term>Génotype</term>
<term>Phytophthora</term>
<term>Répétitions microsatellites</term>
<term>Variation génétique</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Analysis of an organism's genetic diversity requires a method that gives reliable, reproducible results. Microsatellites are robust markers, however, detection of allele sizes can be difficult with some systems as well as consistency among laboratories. In this study, our two laboratories used 219 isolates of Phytophthora sojae to compare three microsatellite methods. Two capillary electrophoresis methods, the Applied Biosystems 3730 Genetic Analyzer and the CEQ 8000 Genetic Analysis system, detected an average of 2.4-fold more alleles compared to gel electrophoresis with a mean of 8.8 and 3.6 alleles per locus using capillary and gel methods, respectively. The two capillary methods were comparable, although allele sizes differed consistently by an average of 3.2 bp across isolates. Differences between capillary methods could be overcome if reference standard DNA genotypes are shared between collaborating laboratories.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">21744147</PMID>
<DateCompleted><Year>2012</Year>
<Month>01</Month>
<Day>19</Day>
</DateCompleted>
<DateRevised><Year>2019</Year>
<Month>12</Month>
<Day>10</Day>
</DateRevised>
<Article PubModel="Print-Electronic"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Electronic">1573-6776</ISSN>
<JournalIssue CitedMedium="Internet"><Volume>33</Volume>
<Issue>11</Issue>
<PubDate><Year>2011</Year>
<Month>Nov</Month>
</PubDate>
</JournalIssue>
<Title>Biotechnology letters</Title>
<ISOAbbreviation>Biotechnol Lett</ISOAbbreviation>
</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Comparison of three microsatellite analysis methods for detecting genetic diversity in Phytophthora sojae (Stramenopila: Oomycete).</ArticleTitle>
<Pagination><MedlinePgn>2217-23</MedlinePgn>
</Pagination>
<ELocationID EIdType="doi" ValidYN="Y">10.1007/s10529-011-0682-9</ELocationID>
<Abstract><AbstractText>Analysis of an organism's genetic diversity requires a method that gives reliable, reproducible results. Microsatellites are robust markers, however, detection of allele sizes can be difficult with some systems as well as consistency among laboratories. In this study, our two laboratories used 219 isolates of Phytophthora sojae to compare three microsatellite methods. Two capillary electrophoresis methods, the Applied Biosystems 3730 Genetic Analyzer and the CEQ 8000 Genetic Analysis system, detected an average of 2.4-fold more alleles compared to gel electrophoresis with a mean of 8.8 and 3.6 alleles per locus using capillary and gel methods, respectively. The two capillary methods were comparable, although allele sizes differed consistently by an average of 3.2 bp across isolates. Differences between capillary methods could be overcome if reference standard DNA genotypes are shared between collaborating laboratories.</AbstractText>
</Abstract>
<AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Stewart</LastName>
<ForeName>Silvina</ForeName>
<Initials>S</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Department of Plant Pathology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA. silvina@iastate.edu</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Wickramasinghe</LastName>
<ForeName>Damitha</ForeName>
<Initials>D</Initials>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Dorrance</LastName>
<ForeName>Anne E</ForeName>
<Initials>AE</Initials>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Robertson</LastName>
<ForeName>Alison E</ForeName>
<Initials>AE</Initials>
</Author>
</AuthorList>
<Language>eng</Language>
<PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D003160">Comparative Study</PublicationType>
<PublicationType UI="D023362">Evaluation Study</PublicationType>
<PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType>
<PublicationType UI="D013485">Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't</PublicationType>
</PublicationTypeList>
<ArticleDate DateType="Electronic"><Year>2011</Year>
<Month>07</Month>
<Day>09</Day>
</ArticleDate>
</Article>
<MedlineJournalInfo><Country>Netherlands</Country>
<MedlineTA>Biotechnol Lett</MedlineTA>
<NlmUniqueID>8008051</NlmUniqueID>
<ISSNLinking>0141-5492</ISSNLinking>
</MedlineJournalInfo>
<CitationSubset>IM</CitationSubset>
<MeshHeadingList><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000483" MajorTopicYN="N">Alleles</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D019075" MajorTopicYN="N">Electrophoresis, Capillary</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000379" MajorTopicYN="N">methods</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D014644" MajorTopicYN="Y">Genetic Variation</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D005838" MajorTopicYN="N">Genotype</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D018895" MajorTopicYN="Y">Microsatellite Repeats</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D058889" MajorTopicYN="N">Molecular Typing</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000379" MajorTopicYN="Y">methods</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D010838" MajorTopicYN="N">Phytophthora</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000145" MajorTopicYN="Y">classification</QualifierName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000235" MajorTopicYN="Y">genetics</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
</MeshHeadingList>
</MedlineCitation>
<PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="received"><Year>2011</Year>
<Month>04</Month>
<Day>21</Day>
</PubMedPubDate>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="accepted"><Year>2011</Year>
<Month>06</Month>
<Day>22</Day>
</PubMedPubDate>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2011</Year>
<Month>7</Month>
<Day>12</Day>
<Hour>6</Hour>
<Minute>0</Minute>
</PubMedPubDate>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2011</Year>
<Month>7</Month>
<Day>12</Day>
<Hour>6</Hour>
<Minute>0</Minute>
</PubMedPubDate>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2012</Year>
<Month>1</Month>
<Day>20</Day>
<Hour>6</Hour>
<Minute>0</Minute>
</PubMedPubDate>
</History>
<PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus>
<ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">21744147</ArticleId>
<ArticleId IdType="doi">10.1007/s10529-011-0682-9</ArticleId>
<ArticleId IdType="pmc">PMC3181407</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
<ReferenceList><Reference><Citation>Science. 2006 Sep 1;313(5791):1261-6</Citation>
<ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">16946064</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</Reference>
<Reference><Citation>Genetics. 1996 Apr;142(4):1119-27</Citation>
<ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">8846892</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</Reference>
<Reference><Citation>Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2002;40:349-79</Citation>
<ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">12147764</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</Reference>
<Reference><Citation>Genome Res. 2002 Mar;12(3):430-5</Citation>
<ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">11875031</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</Reference>
<Reference><Citation>Biotechnol Lett. 2011 Apr;33(4):715-20</Citation>
<ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">21107649</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</Reference>
<Reference><Citation>BMC Genomics. 2008;9:620</Citation>
<ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">19099584</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</Reference>
<Reference><Citation>Mycologia. 2007 Nov-Dec;99(6):877-83</Citation>
<ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">18333511</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</Reference>
<Reference><Citation>BMC Genomics. 2006;7:245</Citation>
<ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">17007642</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</Reference>
<Reference><Citation>Nat Biotechnol. 2000 Feb;18(2):233-4</Citation>
<ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">10657137</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</Reference>
</ReferenceList>
</PubmedData>
</pubmed>
<affiliations><list><country><li>États-Unis</li>
</country>
<region><li>Iowa</li>
</region>
<settlement><li>Ames (Iowa)</li>
</settlement>
<orgName><li>Université d'État de l'Iowa</li>
</orgName>
</list>
<tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Dorrance, Anne E" sort="Dorrance, Anne E" uniqKey="Dorrance A" first="Anne E" last="Dorrance">Anne E. Dorrance</name>
<name sortKey="Robertson, Alison E" sort="Robertson, Alison E" uniqKey="Robertson A" first="Alison E" last="Robertson">Alison E. Robertson</name>
<name sortKey="Wickramasinghe, Damitha" sort="Wickramasinghe, Damitha" uniqKey="Wickramasinghe D" first="Damitha" last="Wickramasinghe">Damitha Wickramasinghe</name>
</noCountry>
<country name="États-Unis"><region name="Iowa"><name sortKey="Stewart, Silvina" sort="Stewart, Silvina" uniqKey="Stewart S" first="Silvina" last="Stewart">Silvina Stewart</name>
</region>
</country>
</tree>
</affiliations>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Bois/explor/PhytophthoraV1/Data/Main/Exploration

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001773 | SxmlIndent | more

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd -nk 001773 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Bois
   |area=    PhytophthoraV1
   |flux=    Main
   |étape=   Exploration
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     pubmed:21744147
   |texte=   Comparison of three microsatellite analysis methods for detecting genetic diversity in Phytophthora sojae (Stramenopila: Oomycete).
}}

Pour générer des pages wiki

HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/RBID.i   -Sk "pubmed:21744147" \
       | HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd   \
       | NlmPubMed2Wicri -a PhytophthoraV1

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.38.
Data generation: Fri Nov 20 11:20:57 2020. Site generation: Wed Mar 6 16:48:20 2024

	Serveur d'exploration Phytophthora
	Attention, ce site est en cours de développement ! Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts. Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

Serveur d'exploration Phytophthora

Comparison of three microsatellite analysis methods for detecting genetic diversity in Phytophthora sojae (Stramenopila: Oomycete).

Comparison of three microsatellite analysis methods for detecting genetic diversity in Phytophthora sojae (Stramenopila: Oomycete).

Source :

Descripteurs français

English descriptors

Abstract

Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)

Le document en format XML

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

Pour générer des pages wiki