Probabilistic analysis of recessive mutagenesis screen strategies

Probabilistic analysis of recessive mutagenesis screen strategies Random mutagenesis screens for recessive phenotypes require three generations of breeding, using either a backcross (BC) or intercross (IC) strategy. Hence, they are more costly and technically demanding than those for dominant phenotypes. Maximizing the return from these screens requires maximizing the number of mutations that are bred to homozyosity in the G3 generation. Using a probabilistic approach, we compare different designs of screens for recessive phenotypes and the impact each one has on the number of mutations that can be effectively screened. We address the issue of BC versus IC strategies and consider genome-wide, region-specific screens and suppressor screens. We find that optimally designed BC and IC screens allow the screening of, on average, similar numbers of mutations but that interpedigree variation is more pronounced when the IC strategy is employed. By conducting a retrospective analysis of published mutagenesis screens, we show that, depending on the strategy, a threefold difference in the numbers of mutations screened per animal used could be expected. This method allows researchers to contrast, for a range of experimental designs, the cost per mutation screened and to maximize the number of mutations that one can expect to screen in a given experiment. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Mammalian Genome Springer Journals

Probabilistic analysis of recessive mutagenesis screen strategies

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/probabilistic-analysis-of-recessive-mutagenesis-screen-strategies-Zr00PTnJM0
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 by Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.
Subject
Life Sciences; Anatomy; Cell Biology; Zoology
ISSN
0938-8990
eISSN
1432-1777
D.O.I.
10.1007/s00335-006-0057-z
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Random mutagenesis screens for recessive phenotypes require three generations of breeding, using either a backcross (BC) or intercross (IC) strategy. Hence, they are more costly and technically demanding than those for dominant phenotypes. Maximizing the return from these screens requires maximizing the number of mutations that are bred to homozyosity in the G3 generation. Using a probabilistic approach, we compare different designs of screens for recessive phenotypes and the impact each one has on the number of mutations that can be effectively screened. We address the issue of BC versus IC strategies and consider genome-wide, region-specific screens and suppressor screens. We find that optimally designed BC and IC screens allow the screening of, on average, similar numbers of mutations but that interpedigree variation is more pronounced when the IC strategy is employed. By conducting a retrospective analysis of published mutagenesis screens, we show that, depending on the strategy, a threefold difference in the numbers of mutations screened per animal used could be expected. This method allows researchers to contrast, for a range of experimental designs, the cost per mutation screened and to maximize the number of mutations that one can expect to screen in a given experiment.

Journal

Mammalian GenomeSpringer Journals

Published: Jan 23, 2007

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off