↓ Skip to main content

Simple and fast quantification of DNA damage by real-time PCR, and its application to nuclear and mitochondrial DNA from multiple tissues of aging zebrafish

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Simple and fast quantification of DNA damage by real-time PCR, and its application to nuclear and mitochondrial DNA from multiple tissues of aging zebrafish
Published in
BMC Research Notes, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-2593-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shusen Zhu, James A. Coffman

Abstract

We describe a real-time (rt) PCR-based method of quantifying DNA damage, adapted from the long-run rtPCR method of DNA damage quantification (LORD-Q) developed by Lehle et al. (Nucleic Acids Res 42(6):e41, 2014). We show that semi-long run rtPCR, which generates amplicons half the length of those generated in LORD-Q, provides equivalent sensitivity for detecting low lesion frequencies, and better sensitivity for detecting high frequencies. The smaller amplicon size greatly facilitates PCR optimization and allows greater flexibility in the use of detection dyes, and a modified data analysis method simplifies the calculation of lesion frequency. The method was used to measure DNA damage in the nuclear and mitochondrial genomes of different tissues in zebrafish of different ages. We find that nuclear DNA damage generally increases with age, and that the amount of mitochondrial DNA damage varies substantially between tissues, increasing with age in liver and brain but not in heart or skeletal muscle, the latter having the highest levels of damage irrespective of age.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 22%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Master 7 10%
Researcher 6 9%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 16 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 6%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 17 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2017.
All research outputs
#20,434,884
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#3,580
of 4,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,460
of 312,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#120
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,555 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.