The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

19 protocols using snptype assay

1

Genotyping of AMD-associated SNPs

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Genomic DNA was extracted from the buffy coat fraction in accordance with standard procedures using a phenol–chloroform extraction method and checked for quality using Qubit (Life Technologies).
Participants were tested for two major AMD-associated SNPs: ARMS2 A69S (rs10490924) and CFH I62V (rs800292) using SNP Type Assays (Fluidigm, San Francisco, CA, USA). The quality control of genotyping was assessed statistically using the Hardy-Weinberg test, and P values > 0.05 were considered that genotype distributions were in Hardy-Weinberg Equation. Five percent random-samples were retyped by two different examiners, and those were 100% matched.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Immunochip SNP Genotyping Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Genotyping of 44 top-associated SNPs from the Immunochip project was performed with a Fluidigm Biomark dynamic array (48.48) and SNPtype assays (Fluidigm Corp.) in 26 samples with expression results in which DNA was available. Eight samples were already genotyped in the Immunochip sample set and were used as quality control for the new genotyping. Three samples had to be removed from the study due to failed genotyping, resulting in a total number of 23 samples, 14 controls and 9 celiac patients. The assay design was performed by the Fluidigm Assay Design Group. Seven of the target SNPs did not fulfill the established assay design requirements due to adjacent SNPs within 20–30 bases on each side of the target SNP, GC content >65% or triallelic SNPs. After an in-deep analysis of those seven SNPs, taking into account the allelic frequencies of the target SNP and the adjacent SNPs and the frequency of each allele in the case of the unique triallelic SNP (rs61907765) in Ensembl, we decided to omit this obstacle in the design of six SNPs and to remove the SNP rs60215663 from the analysis due to smaller minor-allele frequency than adjacent SNPs. Complete genotyping results are available as Supplementary Material.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Genotyping Protocols for Genetic Diversity

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Genotyping was carried out using Illumina GoldenGate assays for the exploration stage at the Genomics Core Facility (Technion, Haifa, Israel), and the Biomark system (Fluidigm, South San Francisco, CA) for the replication stage at Biological Services (Weizmann Institute for Science, Rehovot, Israel), according to the manufacturer's protocols.17 (link),18 (link) SNP assays were designed by Illumina or by Fluidigm SNPtype Assays. Subjects with <90% successful genotyping or deviating from the expected European clustering were excluded from the analysis, about 10% of the samples. SNPs with minor allele frequencies (MAF) less than 0.05, or not in Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium, or with GenCall score <0.5 were also excluded from the analysis, about 30% of SNPs.19 (link) Population substructure was determined using principal component analysis and 24 SNPs used to infer population ancestry (genomic control SNPs) (Table2).20 (link) The FST score, that is, the contribution by each centre (the S subscript) to the total genetic variance (the T subscript), was about 0.02, which is as expected for a European population, and implies a high degree of similarity among cohorts.21 (link)
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

SNP Genotyping via Fluidigm Platform

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping was performed using Fluidigm SNP Type assays and Fluidigm 48.48 Dynamic Array IFC (integrated fluidic circuit) for Genotyping on the Fluidigm BioMark platform. The assays are based on allele-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection system and include locus-specific primers and specific target amplification (STA) primers. The data were analysed using the BioMark SNP Genotyping Analysis software. All assays were custom-prepared and further details are available upon request from corresponding author. DNA analysis included 44 SNPs selected within the susceptibility loci potentially related to coronary artery disease, carotid artery intima-media thickness (IMT), and in nitric oxide synthase gene (Tab. 1).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Genotyping Vitamin D Metabolism Enzymes

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Genomic DNA was extracted from whole blood samples stored at −80°C using DNeasy Blood & Tissue Kit (Qiagen, Germantown, MD) and set at 50 ng/μL.
Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), validated by sequencing in the 1000 Genomes project, with a minor allele frequency of ≥5% in enzymes directly involved in vitamin D metabolism (CYP2R1, CYP27A1, CYP27B1, CYP24A1, and VDR) were selected for genotyping. Of 365 SNPs that passed the aforementioned criteria, 296 SNPs passed the primer design quality control, for which SNPType assays were obtained from Fluidigm (Fluidigm Corp., South San Francisco, CA). Genotyping was performed on a 96.96 Dynamic Array IFC chip (Fluidigm, PN BMK‐M‐96.96GT) using a BioMark instrument (Fluidigm Corp.) per manufacture's specifications and protocol.
The data were analyzed using the Fluidigm Genotyping Analysis Software with Auto‐Call Analysis feature and the NTC Data Normalization Method with a Confidence Threshold set at the default of 65. There were 761 samples that were genotyped across 296 unique SNPs. Fifteen percent of the replicated samples resulted in 99% intra‐ and 97% interplate reproducibility.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Genotyping AMD-associated SNPs

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Genomic DNA was extracted from the buffy coat fraction in accordance with standard procedures using a phenol-chloroform extraction method and checked for quality using Qubit (Life Technologies).
Participants were tested for three major AMD-associated SNPs: ARMS2 A69S (rs10490924), CFH I62V (rs800292), and CFH Y402H (rs1061170) using SNP Type Assays (Fluidigm, San Francisco, CA, USA). The quality control of genotyping was assessed statistically using the Hardy-Weinberg test, and P values more than 0.05 were considered that genotype distributions were in HWE. 5% random-samples were retyped by two different examiners, and those were 100% matched.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Genotyping of 25 SNPs in Punjabi Cohort

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Genotyping of 25 SNPs selected for validation in the Punjabi replication sample (n=2,397) was performed on the BioMark HD MX/HX (Fluidigm) using the Fluidigm 96.96 GT Dynamic Array chip and SNPtype assays (Fluidigm, San Francisco, CA, USA) at Rutgers’s Core lab. Upon completion of PCR amplification, end-point data was collected using the Fluidigm BioMarkHD Genetic Analysis instrument. Individual genotype calls and data analysis was performed using the Fluidigm SNP Genotyping Analysis Software v 3.0.2.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

SNP Genotyping with Allelic Discrimination

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
SNP genotyping was assessed using allelic discrimination with SNPType assays ordered from Fluidigm. When SNPType assays were not available, TaqMan assays (Life Technologies) were used instead. Because DNA concentration available was below supplier recommendation, a Specific Target Amplification was performed to enrich targeted SNP sequences according to the supplier’s instructions.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Genetic Variants and Gene Expression in Ovarian Cancer

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Tumour DNA was still available for 297 out of 378 patients from the AGO-OVAR 11 trial, from which patients with high-grade serous histology (n = 211) and complete resection (n = 96) or residual disease (n = 115) were selected for variant genotyping via SNPtype assays (Fluidigm). Assays were designed for 10 variants of interest with allele-specific primers (Fluidigm; Supplementary Table 6) and allele-specific PCR products were detected with FAM or HEX-labelled universal probes (Fluidigm). Variant genotype was then tested for association with log2 normalised DASL gene expression data for variant-gene pairs of interest under an allelic model via GraphPad Prism v9.0 using Student’s t test to compare two groups or ANOVA between three groups. A linear test for trend was performed after ANOVA as well as after a linear regression analysis to check whether the genotype was associated with the transcript levels under an allelic model. Sequences for the selected Illumina Human HT-12 WG-DASL V4.0 R2 expression bead chip assays are provided in Supplementary Table 4. eQTL analysis was also performed for patients after stratification by debulking. Variant genotypes were further tested as predictors of progression-free survival in survival analysis via GraphPad Prism v9.0.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

SNP Genotyping with 96.96 Dynamic Arrays

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The SNP genotyping procedure using 96.96 Dynamic Arrays™ with integrated fluidic circuits (IFCs)91 (link) was conducted according to the manufacturer’s protocol for genotyping with SNPtype™ Assays (Advanced Development Protocol 34, Fluidigm corp.). Low DNA samples were pre-amplified in a modified STA for enrichment of the target loci before the SNP genotyping PCR. The pre-amplification of the target regions was conducted using 14 cycles for invasive samples and 28 cycles with extracts from non-invasive samples according to von Thaden et al.25 (link).
All experiments and sample setups included NTCs (no template controls) and STA NTCs. In all experiments NTCs and samples were replicated.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!