↓ Skip to main content

Detection of the rs10250202 polymorphism in protection of telomeres 1 gene through introducing a new restriction enzyme site for PCR–RFLP assay

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Detection of the rs10250202 polymorphism in protection of telomeres 1 gene through introducing a new restriction enzyme site for PCR–RFLP assay
Published in
SpringerPlus, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-2214-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sihua Wang, Xiaoran Duan, Tuanwei Wang, Xiaolei Feng, Pengpeng Wang, Wu Yao, Yongjun Wu, Yiming Wu, Zhen Yan, Feifei Feng, Songcheng Yu, Wei Wang

Abstract

Human protection of telomeres 1 (POT1) gene is a single stranded telomere binding proteins with a critical role in ensuring chromosome stability. There have been variants of POT1 gene, and the polymorphisms of POT1 gene were associated with some diseases. Polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) is a traditional method to detect the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), and it can be used to detect the polymorphism of rs10250202. But the restriction enzymes required for the detection of the polymorphism of rs10250202 are expensive. So we designed a novel PCR-RFLP assay for genotyping the POT1 rs10250202 SNP. In the study, a new restriction enzyme cutting site was created by created restriction site PCR (CRS-PCR), and the restriction enzyme BclI for CRS-PCR was cheaper than other enzymes. After detecting Han Chinese workers, Allele frequencies were found to be 51.54 % for allele A and 48.46 % for allele C respectively. The PCR results were confirmed by DNA sequencing. CRS-PCR provides a simple, low-cost, practical, and reproducible method.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 29%
Student > Master 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Lecturer 1 7%
Professor 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 21%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 29%
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 06 October 2020.
All research outputs
#15,376,252
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#935
of 1,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,848
of 309,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#96
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 309,587 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.