RSS

Latest comments

Corrected expression values in supplementary tables (Matthias Erwin Futschik, 06 August 2012)

The original supplementary tables 2-5 of this article contained some entries, which were given as date instead as a number (caused by automatic formating in Excel). These entries were corrected in the revised supplementary tables, that can be found at our web-page. read full comment

Comment on: Russ et al. BMC Genomics, 11:305

Incorrect reference for Bland and Altman (Jacob Hurst, 06 August 2012)

<p>The correct reference is given below. <br/> <br/>J MARTIN BLAND and DOUGLAS G ALTMAN <br/>Misleading Statistics: Errors in Textbooks, Software and Manuals <br/>Int. J. Epidemiol. (1988) 17(2): 245-247 doi:10.1093/ije/17.2.245 <br/> <br/><a href='http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/17/2.toc'>Here is a link to the journal</a></p> read full comment

Comment on: McIntyre et al. BMC Genomics, 12:293

Brief comparison to Roberts et al. (Jonathan Dreyfuss, 06 August 2012)

<p>I hope you enjoy our article and welcome any... read full comment

Comment on: Dreyfuss et al. BMC Genomics, 13:340

There is a typo (Yuan Zhou, 25 July 2012)

There is a typo in the Table 1, where the protein number of Arabidopsis genome should be 27,169. We regret the confusion caused by this typo. read full comment

Comment on: Zhou et al. BMC Genomics, 12:632

Streptomyces genomics (hang wu, 25 July 2012)

<p>Comparative streptomyces genomics was also described in the published manuscript.</p> read full comment

Comment on: Wu et al. BMC Genomics, 13:337

Correction to error in the caption of Figure 5 (Ainhoa Ruiz-Aracama, 04 July 2012)

The authors reported that the caption of Figure 5 was incorrect in the originally published version. The correct caption is:... read full comment

Comment on: Ruiz-Aracama et al. BMC Genomics, 12:251

Web access to Haloarchaeal Protein Clusters (Shiladitya DasSarma, 17 May 2012)

The protein clusters (cHOGs) reported in this paper are now available to the community on HaloWeb: The Haloarchaeal Genomes Website (URL: Halo3 and Halo4). read full comment

Comment on: Capes et al. BMC Genomics, 13:39

erratum concerning Figure 3 (Marc Robinson-Rechavi, 17 May 2012)

A mistake escaped our attention while correcting the proofs, for which we apologize.

The caption of figure 3B should not be: ("B) immune system co-module containing lymph node and thymus", but rather should be: "(B) co-module containing liver and kidney". read full comment

Comment on: Piasecka et al. BMC Genomics, 13:124

Diverse buffers for dosage imbalances (Ariel Fernandez, 17 May 2012)

Expression divergence due to subfunctionalization, the focus of this contribution, is one of various regulatory mechanisms to buffer the effects of dosage imbalance resulting from gene duplication. There are other processes operating at the post-transcriptional regulatory level (protein oligomerization, micro-RNA suppressive control, post-translational modifications, etc.) that may serve as alternative buffers to mitigate the effects of dosage imbalance (A. Fernández and J. Chen, Genome Research 19, 2185-92, 2009). For this reason, we postulate two broad but distinctive distributions corresponding to two qualitatively different buffering regimes that are apparent in the plots of Fig. 1: One regime, in which genes exclusively or nearly exclusively resort to expression divergence as a buffer... read full comment

Comment on: Fernández et al. BMC Genomics, 12:604

Post publication attention (Jing Tu, 27 March 2012)

It has been brought to our attention post publication that we omitted reference to a previously reported method of paired tagging.... read full comment

Comment on: Tu et al. BMC Genomics, 13:43

Typographical error in Table 1 (James Hane, 24 January 2012)

In the fourth line of Table 1 (beginning "CpT"), the 3rd and 4th columns ("ApA ApG") should instead read ("ApG ApA"). read full comment

Comment on: Hane et al. BMC Genomics, 11:655

Correction of Figure 4B (Maria Jose Lopez-Barragan, 23 January 2012)

The ID numbers of the genes and isoforms shown in Figure 4B are MAL7P1.157, MAL7P1.157a and MAL7P1.157b, instead of MAL7P1.175, MAL7P1.175a and MAL7P1.175b, respectively. read full comment

Comment on: López-Barragán et al. BMC Genomics, 12:587

Update information (Ganggang Guo, 29 November 2011)

We've noticed that the link of maize WebFPC database link has changed, and some of the neareast markers of maize ARFs are inconsistent with its BAC location in Table 1. The updated information are as follows:
a. The new link of WebFPC ( http://www.genome.arizona.edu/fpc/maize/WebFPC/) in the 4th part of Methods paragraph;
b. The updated Table 1 is too large to post here, please contact the author when you need, we will email it to you as soon as possible. read full comment

Comment on: Xing et al. BMC Genomics, 12:178

New Address (Yannick Wurm, 24 November 2011)

Fourmidable has moved and is now accessible at antgenomes.org read full comment

Comment on: Wurm et al. BMC Genomics, 10:5

RefGenes is made Open Access (Philip Zimmermann, 24 November 2011)

The RefGenes tool has now been made fully Open Access and has a new website with useful information for the user such as a tutorial and examples. RefGenes can be started directly at www.refgenes.org.

read full comment

Comment on: Hruz et al. BMC Genomics, 12:156

query regarding this software (Mamoonah Chaudhry, 18 October 2011)

dear author,
one of my friend referred this article to me as i was aiming to do allele specific PCR. i found this software very useful.As i am trying to design primers using this software, maximum Tm difference is quite confusing, as far as my knowledge is concerned, it should be not more than 5 degree c. whenever i try to change it in software, it designs no primers. please give me your email address for direct contact or please help me in this regard.

thanks read full comment

Comment on: Wangkumhang et al. BMC Genomics, 8:275

New data link (Esther Black, 18 October 2011)

The microarray data associated with this manuscript can now be found with the GEO accession number GSE31625.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE31625 read full comment

Comment on: Balko et al. BMC Genomics, 7:289

Serious Concerns (Jared Decker, 18 October 2011)

I have serious concerns about the statistical methods used in this paper. With the recent advances in statistical methods for genome-wide association studies, I am troubled that the authors did not account for pedigree relationships between cows in the study. For an overview of different methods available to correct for cryptic relatedness see Nat Rev Genet. 2010 Jul;11(7):459-63.; J Dairy Sci. 2008 Nov;91(11):4414-23.; and Am J Hum Genet. 2011 Jan 7;88(1):76-82..

Furthermore, I am concerned that the authors used PTA values without deregressing the... read full comment

Comment on: Cole et al. BMC Genomics, 12:408

Using Newbler 2.5 (or 2.6) with -cdna and -utr (Sujai Kumar, 19 September 2011)

For transcriptome data, Newbler has had a -cdna option since version 2.3 that makes "isotigs" and "isogroups".

However, since version 2.5(p1), there has been a -urt option as well which is recommended as a way of recovering low coverage transcripts (documented in detail in the manual for version 2.6) - and that is why we recommended using Newbler 2.5 with the -urt option in our paper.

We have been recommending Newbler 2.5 to our collaborators. I have heard of other researchers saying Newbler 2.5 (and now 2.6) didn't work as well as we said it would. However, in all those cases, the -urt option had not been used either.

So we are trying to figure out if some researchers are getting poorer results with Newbler despite using the -urt option, in which case we... read full comment

Comment on: Kumar et al. BMC Genomics, 11:571

Related Algorithms (Jared Roach, 19 September 2011)

The calling schema of parent sibling tracing (Additional File 1B) shows some common heritage with algorithms such as those discussed in these two sources:

Shih MC, Whittemore AS. Allele-sharing among affected relatives:non-parametric methods for identifying genes. Stat Methods Med Res. 2001 Feb;10(1):27-55. Review. PubMed PMID: 11329690

Roach JC, Glusman G, Smit AF, Huff CD, Hubley R, Shannon PT, Rowen L, Pant KP, Goodman N, Bamshad M, Shendure J, Drmanac R, Jorde LB, Hood L, Galas DJ. Analysis of genetic inheritance in a family quartet by whole-genome sequencing. Science. 2010 Apr 30;328(5978):636-9. Epub 2010 Mar 10. PubMed PMID: 20220176; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3037280.
read full comment

Comment on: Lee et al. BMC Genomics, 12:434

Some typographical errors in my article (Xudong Wu, 27 June 2011)

List of typographical errors

B.1.1 in the third sentence: "is pervasive in animals" should be "is pervasive in the human genome"

B.3.2 in the second sentence: "included a third set of" should be "used the set of"

B.3.3 in last sentence:"p-values < 1.7E-289 for the four datasets" should be "p-values ≤ 1.7E-289, two-tailed" read full comment

Comment on: Wu et al. BMC Genomics, 12:244

Some errors in my article (Genyi Li, 10 June 2011)

List of Errors:

B.4.3 in the last sentence: "," should be "."



B.6.2 :1.25 GB should be 1.28 GB .



B.8.2 in last sentence: '(http://hordeum.oscs.montana.edu/genographer/)'
should be removed.



B.11.1 in the first sentence: "243"should be 241



B.16.1 in the second sentence: "and unique Solexa sequence paired-end
sequences" should be ' and unique Solexa paired-end sequences'.
read full comment

Comment on: Li et al. BMC Genomics, 12:249

Correction to the "METHODS SECTION" of the article (King-Hwa Ling, 10 June 2011)

We have previously provided a wrong catalog number and probe for miR-3099 for LNA-ISH procedure reported in the article.

At Methods Section > Locked Nucleic Acids - In situ Hybridisation > Paragraph 2 > Second last sentence:
".......custom-made Sox4_sir3 LNA probes (Cat. no: EQ-70537, Exiqon)........." should be written as ".......custom-made miR-3099 LNA probes (Cat. no: EQ-70532, Exiqon)........."

We would like to apologise to all our readers and sincerely regretted any inconveniences that this mistake may have caused you or your research group. read full comment

Comment on: Ling et al. BMC Genomics, 12:176

Error observed in Table 1 (Guilherme Oliveira, 07 June 2011)

From the authors. We noticed that the error in Table 1 “Protein kinases are classified into eukaryotic protein kinases (ePKs) and atypical protein kinases (aPKs). ePKs include three major classes: serine/threonine kinases (STKs), tyrosine kinases (TKs), and hybrid protein kinases. STKs are further classified into five groups (AGC, CaMK, CMGC, STE, and CK1), while TKs are distributed into the TK and RGC group. Hybrid protein kinases are grouped into TK like and Others”.
The error was not present in the proofed version. read full comment

Comment on: Andrade et al. BMC Genomics, 12:215

You should profile your own cells (Christian Le Gouill, 25 May 2011)

We are developing biosensors to study GPCR signalling. In this project, we decided to mRNA profile about a dozen different isolates of HEK using Illumina’s technology. Our results show a different profile than the one presented in this paper, not for all proteins but some important signalling partners and GPCRs. For example, there is no GNAZ (mRNA or functionally) in our Hek293. Same thing with GPCRs such as PTGFR (FP) or LTB4R, we are working with both receptors and they are not expressed (mRNA or protein) endogenously in Hek293 cells.
There are so many different isolates for Hek, COS, CHO,... that you shouldn't rely on published profiles for your own research; just profile your own cells as they are probably different than those used in other labs, it is not very... read full comment

Comment on: Atwood et al. BMC Genomics, 12:14