Table 5

Pre-restriction of immobilized cDNA

No pre-restriction

Partial pre-restriction

Full pre-restriction


Arabidopsis thaliana


Marking enzymes

FatI

MboI

HinPI

MboI

FatI

MboI


Releasing enzymes

MboI

FatI

MseI

MseI

MboI

FatI

MseI

MseI

TasI

TasI

MseI

MseI

TasI

TasI

TaqI

TaqI

TasI

TasI


Sequence coverage

78 %

70 %

52 %


Sequence redundancy

30 %

30 %

0 %


Average fragment length (nt)

183

237

142


PCR reactions

100 %

125 %

36 %


Mouse


Marking enzymes

MboI

Csp6I

HinPI

MboI

MboI

Csp6I


Releasing enzymes

Csp6I

MseI

TasI

TasI

Csp6I

MseI

MseI

MboI

MseI

MseI

MseI

MboI

FatI

FatI

TaqI

TaqI

FatI

FatI


Sequence coverage

87 %

81 %

50 %


Sequence redundancy

41 %

35 %

0 %


Average fragment length (nt)

270

271

159


PCR reactions

100 %

39 %

25 %


Human


Marking enzymes

MboI

Csp6I

HinPI

MboI

MboI

Csp6I


Releasing enzymes

CspI

MboI

MseI

MseI

CspI

MboI

HinPI

FatI

TasI

TasI

HinPI

FatI

FatI

HinPI

TaqI

TaqI

FatI

HinPI


Sequence coverage

85 %

84 %

63 %


Sequence redundancy

35 %

40 %

0 %


Average fragment length (nt)

274

292

182


PCR reactions

100 %

86 %

61 %


Simulation of cDNA-AFLP with sequential digestion protocol on Arabidopsis, human and mouse RefSeq ESTs was performed. Optimal combination of restriction enzymes (2 marking in combination with 3 releasing enzymes) with the highest sequence coverage was used to compare the effect of partial pre-restriction and full pre-restriction options on maximal transcript coverage, sequence redundancy, average fragment length and reduction of PCR effort (relative to the maximal number of PCR by one of the options).

Weiberg et al. BMC Genomics 2008 9:480   doi:10.1186/1471-2164-9-480

Open Data