Cited by 405Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesPlant Genetic and Mutation Studies

SNP discovery via 454 transcriptome sequencing

Open access
Barbazuk, W. Brad, Emrich, Scott J., Chen, Hsin D., Li, Li, Schnable, Patrick S.·2007·The Plant Journal

Abstract

Summary: A massively parallel pyro‐sequencing technology commercialized by 454 Life Sciences Corporation was used to sequence the transcriptomes of shoot apical meristems isolated from two inbred lines of maize using laser capture microdissection (LCM). A computational pipeline that uses the POLYBAYES polymorphism detection system was adapted for 454 ESTs and used to detect SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) between the two inbred lines. Putative SNPs were computationally identified using 260 000 and 280 000 454 ESTs from the B73 and Mo17 inbred lines, respectively. Over 36 000 putative SNPs were detected within 9980 unique B73 genomic anchor sequences (MAGIs). Stringent post‐processing reduced this number to > 7000 putative SNPs. Over 85% (94/110) of a sample of these putative SNPs were successfully validated by Sanger sequencing. Based on this validation rate, this pilot experiment conservatively identified > 4900 valid SNPs within > 2400 maize genes. These results demonstrate that 454‐based transcriptome sequencing is an excellent method for the high‐throughput acquisition of gene‐associated SNPs.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-313x.2007.03193.x

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barbazuk, W. B., Emrich, S. J., Chen, H. D., Li, L., & Schnable, P. S.
Affiliations
  • Donald Danforth Plant Science Center (US)
  • Iowa State University (US)
Corresponding author
Schnable, Patrick S.
Venue
The Plant Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-07-27
Volume
51
Issue
5
Pages
910-918
ISSN
  • 0960-7412 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-313X
OpenAlex
W2114475493
Cited by
405
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 38 · 2012: 60
FWCI
20.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Plant Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0321595, 0527192, 0321711)
  • Iowa State University
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Genetic and Mutation Studies
Keywords
single nucleotide polymorphisms, SNP discovery, maize, shoot apical meristem, 454 pyrosequencing, expressed sequence tags, laser capture microdissection, B73, Mo17, inbred lines, SNP validation
MeSH terms
Base Sequence, Zea mays, Molecular Sequence Data, Software, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Meristem, Genome, Plant, Expressed Sequence Tags, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide

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