2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.ab.2009.04.020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Preparation of genome-wide DNA fragment libraries using bisulfite in polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis slices with formamide denaturation and quality control for massively parallel sequencing by oligonucleotide ligation and detection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
9
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
1
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, the in solution method is preferred for larger DNA input (>2 ug starting material), while the in gel method is ideal for low amounts of starting material. As shown previously [15], 50 ng and even 5 ng can be bisulfite converted successfully in a gel with 15 cycles and 22 cycles of PCR amplification. This would correspond to about 500 ng or 50 ng of starting material, respectively, if losses are assumed to be the same as in the experiment described here.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 63%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Therefore, the in solution method is preferred for larger DNA input (>2 ug starting material), while the in gel method is ideal for low amounts of starting material. As shown previously [15], 50 ng and even 5 ng can be bisulfite converted successfully in a gel with 15 cycles and 22 cycles of PCR amplification. This would correspond to about 500 ng or 50 ng of starting material, respectively, if losses are assumed to be the same as in the experiment described here.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 63%
“…Two bisulfite-converted libraries of Escherichia coli ( E. coli ) DH10B were constructed, and the bisulfite conversion was performed in solution (bis-sol) or in a polyacrylamide gel (bis-gel) as previously described [15] (see Figure 1 for outline). Equal amounts of DNA (240 ng) were used for both bisulfite conversion methods to compare the efficiency of each method.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations