Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 345

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reducing Codon Redundancy and Screening Effort of Combinatorial Protein Libraries Created by Saturation Mutagenesis

Kille, Sabrina, Acevedo-Rocha, Carlos G., Parra, Loreto P., Zhang, Zhi-Gang, Opperman, Diederik J., Reetz, Manfred T., Acevedo, Juan Pablo·2013·ACS Synthetic Biology

Abstract

Saturation mutagenesis probes define sections of the vast protein sequence space. However, even if randomization is limited this way, the combinatorial numbers problem is severe. Because diversity is created at the codon level, codon redundancy is a crucial factor determining the necessary effort for library screening. Additionally, due to the probabilistic nature of the sampling process, oversampling is required to ensure library completeness as well as a high probability to encounter all unique variants. Our trick employs a special mixture of three primers, creating a degeneracy of 22 unique codons coding for the 20 canonical amino acids. Therefore, codon redundancy and subsequent screening effort is significantly reduced, and a balanced distribution of codon per amino acid is achieved, as demonstrated exemplarily for a library of cyclohexanone monooxygenase. We show that this strategy is suitable for any saturation mutagenesis methodology to generate less-redundant libraries.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/sb300037w

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 345

Metadata

Authors
Kille, S., Acevedo-Rocha, C. G., Parra, L. P., Zhang, Z.-G., Opperman, D. J., Reetz, M. T., & Acevedo, J. P.
Venue
ACS Synthetic Biology
Published
2012-06-22
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
83-92
ISSN
2161-5063 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2032479422
Cited by
345
References
2
FWCI
4.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.