The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Genome-wide detection of segmental duplications and potential assembly errors in the human genome sequence
Open accessAbstract
Background: Previous studies have suggested that recent segmental duplications, which are often involved in chromosome rearrangements underlying genomic disease, account for some 5% of the human genome. We have developed rapid computational heuristics based on BLAST analysis to detect segmental duplications, as well as regions containing potential sequence misassignments in the human genome assemblies. Results: Our analysis of the June 2002 public human genome assembly revealed that 107.4 of 3,043.1 megabases (Mb) (3.53%) of sequence contained segmental duplications, each with size equal or more than 5 kb and 90% identity. We have also detected that 38.9 Mb (1.28%) of sequence within this assembly is likely to be involved in sequence misassignment errors. Furthermore, we have identified a significant subset (199,965 of 2,327,473 or 8.6%) of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the public databases that are not true SNPs but are potential paralogous sequence variants. Conclusion: Using two distinct computational approaches, we have identified most of the sequences in the human genome that have undergone recent segmental duplications. Near-identical segmental duplications present a major challenge to the completion of the human genome sequence. Potential sequence misassignments detected in this study would require additional efforts to resolve.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The sequence of the human genome
Venter, J. C., Adams, M. D., Myers, E. W., Li, P. W., Mural, R. J., Sutton, G. G., Smith, H. O., Yandell, M., Evans, C. A., Holt, R. A., et al. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1058040 · Cited by 13,909
A 1.5 million–base pair inversion polymorphism in families with Williams-Beuren syndrome
Osborne, L. R., Li, M., Pober, B., Chitayat, D., Bodurtha, J., Mandel, A., Costa, T., Grebe, T., Cox, S., Tsui, L.-C., et al. (2001) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng753 · Cited by 344
Self-citation
Cited by
Detection of large-scale variation in the human genome
Iafrate, A. J., Feuk, L., Rivera, M. N., Listewnik, M. L., Donahoe, P. K., Qi, Y., Scherer, S. W., & Lee, C. (2004) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng1416 · Cited by 2,892
Self-citationThe Diploid Genome Sequence of an Individual Human
Levy, S., Sutton, G., Ng, P. C., Feuk, L., Halpern, A. L., Walenz, B. P., Axelrod, N., Huang, J., Kirkness, E. F., Denisov, G., et al. (2007) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050254 · Cited by 1,778
Self-citationThe DNA sequence of the human X chromosome
Ross, M. T., Grafham, D. V., Coffey, A. J., Scherer, S., McLay, K., Muzny, D., Platzer, M., Howell, G. R., Burrows, C., Bird, C. P., et al. (2005) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature03440 · Cited by 1,129
Self-citationGlobal diversity, population stratification, and selection of human copy-number variation
Sudmant, P. H., Mallick, S., Nelson, B. J., Hormozdiari, F., Krumm, N., Huddleston, J., Coe, B. P., Baker, C., Nordenfelt, S., Bamshad, M., et al. (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aab3761 · Cited by 345
Metadata
- Authors
- Cheung, J., Estivill, X., Khaja, R., MacDonald, J. R., Lau, K., Tsui, L.-C., & Scherer, S. W.
- Venue
- Genome Biology
- Published
- 2003-04
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- R25-R25
- ISSN
- 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
- 1474-760X
- OpenAlex
- W2155919888
- Cited by
- 256
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 16.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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.