Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 522

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Normalization and subtraction: two approaches to facilitate gene discovery.

Open access
Bonaldo, M F, Lennon, G, Soares, M B·1996·Genome Research

Abstract

Large-scale sequencing of cDNAs randomly picked from libraries has proven to be a very powerful approach to discover (putatively) expressed sequences that, in turn, once mapped, may greatly expedite the process involved in the identification and cloning of human disease genes. However, the integrity of the data and the pace at which novel sequences can be identified depends to a great extent on the cDNA libraries that are used. Because altogether, in a typical cell, the mRNAs of the prevalent and intermediate frequency classes comprise as much as 50-65% of the total mRNA mass, but represent no more than 1000-2000 different mRNAs, redundant identification of mRNAs of these two frequency classes is destined to become overwhelming relatively early in any such random gene discovery programs, thus seriously compromising their cost-effectiveness. With the goal of facilitating such efforts, previously we developed a method to construct directionally cloned normalized cDNA libraries and applied it to generate infant brain (INIB) and fetal liver/spleen (INFLS) libraries, from which a total of 45,192 and 86,088 expressed sequence tags, respectively, have been derived. While improving the representation of the longest cDNAs in our libraries, we developed three additional methods to normalize cDNA libraries and generated over 35 libraries, most of which have been contributed to our integrated Molecular Analysis of Genomes and Their Expression (IMAGE) Consortium and thus distributed widely and used for sequencing and mapping. In an attempt to facilitate the process of gene discovery further, we have also developed a subtractive hybridization approach designed specifically to eliminate (or reduce significantly the representation of) large pools of arrayed and (mostly) sequenced clones from normalized libraries yet to be (or just partly) surveyed. Here we present a detailed description and a comparative analysis of four methods that we developed and used to generate normalize cDNA libraries from human (15), mouse (3), rat (2), as well as the parasite Schistosoma mansoni (1). In addition, we describe the construction and preliminary characterization of a subtracted liver/spleen library (INFLS-SI) that resulted from the elimination (or reduction of representation) of -5000 INFLS-IMAGE clones from the INFLS library.

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 · 10.1101/gr.6.9.791

Cites

19 of 19 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

Show all 19 references

Cited by

See all 522

Metadata

Authors
Bonaldo, M. F., Lennon, G., & Soares, M. B.
Venue
Genome Research
Published
1996-09
Volume
6
Issue
9
Pages
791-806
ISSN
1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1998415512
Cited by
522
References
19
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Normalization and subtraction: two approaches to facilitate gene discovery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1101/gr.6.9.791
The paper
Bonaldo, M. F., Lennon, G., & Soares, M. B. (1996). Normalization and subtraction: two approaches to facilitate gene discovery. Genome Research. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.6.9.791

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.