↓ Skip to main content

A quantitative and qualitative comparison of illumina MiSeq and 454 amplicon sequencing for genotyping the highly polymorphic major histocompatibility complex (MHC) in a non-model species

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
A quantitative and qualitative comparison of illumina MiSeq and 454 amplicon sequencing for genotyping the highly polymorphic major histocompatibility complex (MHC) in a non-model species
Published in
BMC Research Notes, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-2654-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Haslina Razali, Emily O’Connor, Anna Drews, Terry Burke, Helena Westerdahl

Abstract

High-throughput sequencing enables high-resolution genotyping of extremely duplicated genes. 454 amplicon sequencing (454) has become the standard technique for genotyping the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) genes in non-model organisms. However, illumina MiSeq amplicon sequencing (MiSeq), which offers a much higher read depth, is now superseding 454. The aim of this study was to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the performance of MiSeq in relation to 454 for genotyping MHC class I alleles using a house sparrow (Passer domesticus) dataset with pedigree information. House sparrows provide a good study system for this comparison as their MHC class I genes have been studied previously and, consequently, we had prior expectations concerning the number of alleles per individual. We found that 454 and MiSeq performed equally well in genotyping amplicons with low diversity, i.e. amplicons from individuals that had fewer than 6 alleles. Although there was a higher rate of failure in the 454 dataset in resolving amplicons with higher diversity (6-9 alleles), the same genotypes were identified by both 454 and MiSeq in 98% of cases. We conclude that low diversity amplicons are equally well genotyped using either 454 or MiSeq, but the higher coverage afforded by MiSeq can lead to this approach outperforming 454 in amplicons with higher diversity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 25%
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Master 9 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 7 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 27%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 9 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 26 October 2017.
All research outputs
#4,049,251
of 22,994,508 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#607
of 4,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,813
of 316,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#25
of 152 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,994,508 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
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 316,684 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 152 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.