• No results found

Advanced genome-wide screening in human genomic disorders Knijnenburg, J.

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Advanced genome-wide screening in human genomic disorders Knijnenburg, J."

Copied!
2
0
0

Bezig met laden.... (Bekijk nu de volledige tekst)

Hele tekst

(1)

Advanced genome-wide screening in human genomic disorders

Knijnenburg, J.

Citation

Knijnenburg, J. (2009, February 24). Advanced genome-wide screening in human genomic disorders. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/1887/13531

Version: Corrected Publisher’s Version

License: Licence agreement concerning inclusion of doctoral thesis in the Institutional Repository of the University of Leiden

Downloaded from: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/13531

Note: To cite this publication please use the final published version (if

applicable).

(2)

Propositions

with the thesis

Advanced genome-wide screening in human genomic disorders

of

Jeroen Knijnenburg

• In a significant proportion of cases with a complex chromosomal translocation pattern classical G-banding only is not enough to elucidate the rearrangements. (This thesis)

• To elucidate the structure and complexity of a ring chromosome high resolution molecular investigations are always needed. (This thesis)

• Pooling normal copy number variation in a database such as the Database of Genomic Variants is of crucial importance for the correct interpretation of data, but it may also cause false negative calls in the case of polygenic involvement or homozygous deletions of the copy number variant. (This thesis)

• Together with a microduplication of 3q29 unknown genetic or epigenetic factors play a role in the determination of the phenotypic severity of this abnormality. (This thesis)

• As screening for genetic causes of idiopathic mental retardation remains a genome- wide job, increase of resolution will yield more genetic diagnoses but will also yield a burden of unwanted genetic information.

• Array-CGH will soon be replaced by sequencing techniques.

• Not the identification but the interpretation of copy number variation has become the challenge for the future.

• The term “normal” in normal copy number variation is misleading, since its influence will depend on the genetic background in several cases.

• Chromosome banding will remain indispensible for clinical cytogenetics to elucidate certain types of structural alterations.

• As in vitro cell culture systems are frequently instable, results obtained with commonly used cell lines should be interpreted with great care.

• Scientific publications that reach the general news bulletins are often interpreted incorrectly by the layman.

• Knowledge transfer is much more efficient at small and dedicated conferences than at large general congresses.

• Although almost all geographic maps imply that Belgium is situated under the Netherlands, this is not self-evident.

Referenties

GERELATEERDE DOCUMENTEN

Since the implementation of techniques for the detection of copy number variations of the human genome, such as array comparative genomic hybridization

In theory, similar or better prediction accuracies than those reported in this study can be obtained if data on all the individuals in the meta-GWAS are available, and if they

High throughput screening of human subtelomeric DNA for copy number changes using multiplex amplifiable probe hybridisation (MAPH). 21 Schouten JP, McElgunn CJ, Waaijer R, Z

We have used Multiplex Amplifiable Probe Hybridization (MAPH) (8) to look for copy number changes in the sarcoglycan Į, ȕ, J and į genes in 5 sarcoglycanopathy patients diagnosed

Copy number changes detected by MAPH were verified using another technique, primarily FISH with a bacterial artificial chromosome (B AC) or cosmid probe covering the appropriate

To test the efficacy of this approach we designed probe sets to screen for deletions and duplications in the EXT1 (MIM# 608177) and EXT2 (MIM# 608210) genes, in which mutations

We screened the entire CBP gene for point mutations and small deletions or insertions using primarily DGGE, with target sequences that were not suited for DGGE

We excluded 32% of assays across all regions from analysis; 3.2% (5 of 157) assays produced no PCR product, and 29% (13 of 45) of those in nonduplicon regions (control regions