A modified Luria-Delbrück fluctuation assay for estimating and comparing mutation rates
Abstract
We have investigated the accuracy with which mutation rates may be estimated using a modification of the Luria and Delbrück fluctuation experiment protocol. The modification involves growing a larger-than-usual culture, and plating out a small aliquot of it. Monte Carlo simulations of the experiments confirm that the modification leads to a decrease in the coefficient of variation of the estimated mutation rate where this is based on the median number of mutants detected in a number of cultures grown in parallel. If sets of experimental and control cultures are compared using the Mann-Whitney U-test, then fractional increases in mutation rate can be reliably detected using relatively small numbers of cultures. The modified protocols promise better estimates of mutation rates, offer a powerful test of differences in mutation rates, and are easier to implement in practice.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A solution for the case ε ≠ 1 has been found by Stewart and reiterated by Jones.
“Solution for the case ε ≠ 1 has been found by Stewart and reiterated by Jones [9,31]:”
From Efficient, robust, and versatile fluctuation data analysis using MLE MUtation Rate calculator (mlemur) (2023) · cites this paper as [31]
Cites
Analysis of the Luria–Delbrück distribution using discrete convolution powers
Ma, W. T., Sandri, G. V., & Sarkar, S. (1992) · Journal of Applied Probability · doi:10.1017/s0021900200043023 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Methods for determining spontaneous mutation rates
Foster, P. L. (2006) · Methods in Enzymology · doi:10.1016/s0076-6879(05)09012-9 · Cited by 302 · see citing works
Łazowski, K. (2023) · Mutation Research - Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis · doi:10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2023.111816 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
- Authors
- Crane, G. J., Thomas, S. M., & Jones, M. E.
- Affiliations
- Flinders University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Crane, Glenis J.
- Venue
- Mutation Research - Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1996-07
- Volume
- 354
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 171-182
- ISSN
- 0027-5107 (ISSN-L)
- 1386-1964
- OpenAlex
- W2020494807
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 0.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Mutation research. Fundamental and molecular mechanisms of mutagenesis (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Australian Research Council
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
- Keywords
- mutation rate estimation, coefficient of variation, Mann-Whitney test, statistical power, Monte Carlo simulation
- MeSH terms
- Computer Simulation, Histidine, Models, Genetic, Monte Carlo Method, Salmonella typhimurium, Poisson Distribution, Mutagenesis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review