ライフサイエンスコーパス: fragment length

1 d temperature but independent of HTT protein fragment length.

2 ion between DnaG and DnaB determines Okazaki fragment length.

3 ng fragments was determined as a function of fragment length.

4 sis revealed different trajectories for each fragment length.

5 four separate PCRs suitable for fluorescent fragment length analysis and demonstrated STR profiles h

6 Here we describe DNase I-released fragment-length analysis of hypersensitivity (DNase-FLAS

7 iologically interpretable features including fragment length and cleavage specificity to distinguish

8 versus alpha1beta2gamma2 isoform; while the fragment length and frontier molecular orbital energetic

9 DNA fragment length and TaqMan assays were used to genotype

10 Bayesian approach employing distribution of fragment lengths and alignment scores, Short-Pair can re

11 the distribution of fracture-dependent fiber fragment lengths and its time dependence.

12 e observe a highly structured pattern of DNA fragment lengths and positions around nucleosomes in Sac

13 h of sequencing, low allele fractions, short fragment lengths and specialized barcodes, such as uniqu

14 ssociated markers, mean telomere restriction fragment length, and genomic stability differed signific

15 azaki fragment initiation, the regulation of fragment length, and their implications for coordinated

16 res the uniformity of both read position and fragment length, and we explain how to compute a P-value

17 Drift distance (river fragment length available for ichthyoplankton downstream

18 t in-nucleus ligation eliminates restriction fragment length bias found with in-solution ligation.

19 ng origin dependence and determining Okazaki fragment length by restricting Pol delta progression.

20 as well as the relationship of transforming fragment length, concentration, homology, symmetry, and

21 Serum DNA integrity was assessed by fragment length-dependent quantitative real-time polymer

22 Incorporation of mRNA fragment length distribution in paired-end RNA-seq great

23 Fragment length distributions are calculated to predict

24 endent resource for automatic scoring of DNA fragment lengths diversity panels and biparental populat

25 allelic crosstalk, probe affinities and PCR fragment-length effects.

26 ops corresponded to the telomere restriction fragment length from the ALT cell lines as determined by

27 The program analyzes DNA fragment lengths generated in Applied Biosystems(R) (ABI

28 identify a link between DNA methylation and fragment length in circulating cell-free DNA, identify d

29 o high rates of nucleotide damage, short DNA fragment lengths, low endogenous DNA content and the pot

30 lical fragments is examined as a function of fragment length, N-terminal amino acid, precursor confor

31 The anomaly starts at the fragment length of about 70 bp when sharp bends or kinks

32 ly used owing to its low error rate and long fragment length of amplified DNA.

33 producing long sequencing reads with average fragment lengths of over 10,000 base-pairs and maximum l

34 ation approach that reduces the influence of fragment length on signal intensity.

35 rnal data set solely by changing the average fragment length, our calculated data still informs the B

36 Towne-BAC, displayed an altered restriction fragment length pattern, and replicated with increased g

37 Amplified fragment length polymorphic (AFLP) markers were used to

38 IS900 integration loci (MPIL) and amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) analyses were used t

39 botulinum strains was examined by amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) analysis and by sequ

40 Genome-wide cDNA-amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) analysis of leaves f

41 Using Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (AFLP) and methylation sens

42 ating collection and analysis with amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) and microsatellite m

43 kage map was constructed using 148 amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) and six single-stran

44 Here, we use amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) data to assess genet

45 eillance cultures were compared by amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) genomic fingerprinti

46 Amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) is a whole-genome fi

47 dent segregating populations using amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) markers and randomly

48 othesis we used highly polymorphic Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (AFLP) markers as a means t

49 Genetic analysis using amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) markers revealed tha

50 A genome-wide QTL scan using amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) markers revealed thr

51 with 1501 markers, including 1498 amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) markers, the papaya

52 s inbreeding coefficient, f, using amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) markers.

53 is neurona was evaluated using the amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) method.

54 icient purity to give reproducible amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) profiles, but was un

55 nety-six primer sets were used for amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) to characterize the

56 iplex PCR for IS900 loci (MPIL) or amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) types.

57 Amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) was employed as a ge

58 Amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) was used for typing

59 lasmid replicons, virulence genes, amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), and pulsed-field ge

60 -field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), and random amplifie

61 ber tandem-repeat analysis (MLVA), amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), surface layer prote

62 wing cluster analysis based on amplification fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), these strains were

63 results were compared to those of amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), whereby we visually

64 linkage map was constructed using amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP).

65 g primers for high-resolution melting (HRM), fragment length polymorphism (FLP) and sequencing experi

66 ribe inverse PCR-based amplified restriction fragment length polymorphism (iFLP), a new technology th

67 ulosis strain using IS6110-based restriction fragment length polymorphism (IS6110-RFLP) and spoligoty

68 oligotyping with IS6110-targeted restriction fragment length polymorphism (IS6110-RFLP) as the high-r

69 ethod called "multiplex-terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (M-TRFLP)" has been recentl

70 ction (qPCR), mutliplex-terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (M-TRFLP), and clone librar

71 The approach relied on methylation amplified fragment length polymorphism (metAFLP)-derived TTCIV cha

72 data were used to develop a PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) method that rapi

73 using polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) method.

74 ymerase chain reaction and HinfI restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR/RFLP).

75 enes were analyzed by LDR-FM and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analyses.

76 ystis jirovecii that is based on restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis after polym

77 al outbreaks were typed by Afut1 restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis and three P

78 We used restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis as a primar

79 Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis is one of t

80 acidic repeat protein gene, (2) restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis of T. palli

81 Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis of the PCR-

82 ence typing (MLST) and performed restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis of three vi

83 Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis was used to

84 assess the -455G/A polymorphism, restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis with HaeIII

85 le, and molecular relatedness by restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis.

86 ormance liquid chromatography or restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis.

87 s were sequenced or subjected to restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis.

88 ting, IS1004 fingerprinting, and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis.

89 This variation, revealed by restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) and nucleotide seque

90 Conventional block PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) and real-time LightC

91 solates were genotyped by IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) and spoligotyping.

92 yotic species, and we describe a restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) assay that allows th

93 d from mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) restriction-fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) data and allozymes.

94 ence tag polymorphism (ESTP) and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) markers.

95 n of 479 samples was done with a restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) method and the RT-PC

96 o compared to an established PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) method previously ap

97 nts and all were genotyped using Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP) or sequencing.

98 ingle serotype had a single wbiI restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) pattern, while isola

99 tly demonstrate identical IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) patterns (i.e., RFLP

100 The restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) patterns obtained by

101 fied unique HaeIII and HpaII gag restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) profiles resulting f

102 n of the utility of IS6110-based restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) typing compared to a

103 The manual IS6110-based restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) typing method is hig

104 ospital by spoligotyping, IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP), and 24-locus-based

105 to determine how pyrosequencing, restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP), and direct conventi

106 cases were compared by means of restriction-fragment length polymorphism (RFLP), rapid amplified pol

107 olates were analysed with IS6110-restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP), spoligotyping, myco

108 encing of the plasmid DNA and/or restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP).

109 simplex virus (HSV) isolates use restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP).

110 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP).

111 la tularensis to type strains by restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP).

112 d 1,077 controls using PCR-based restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP-PCR) analysis, but fo

113 Terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP) analysis is a wide

114 d spacer (ITS) database terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP) approach.

115 We used terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP) of 18S rDNA and cl

116 ing (SIP) combined with terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP), high-throughput s

117 plaque was analyzed by terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (t-RFLP).

118 s were characterized by terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP).

119 We used terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (TRFLP) analysis to infer d

120 ques, quantitative PCR, terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (TRFLP) and next generation

121 ent were profiled using terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (TRFLP) and sequencing of c

122 ion of polymorphic DNA [RAPD], and amplified fragment length polymorphism [AFLP]) for the characteriz

123 polymorphism (SNP) (screened by restriction fragment length polymorphism [RFLP] analysis) that corre

124 n of the genome, demonstrating a restriction fragment length polymorphism among an encapsulated and n

125 e to conventional nested PCR and restriction fragment length polymorphism analyses for the rapid dete

126 Terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analyses indicate complex a

127 ed for polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis (PCR-RFLP).

128 nd 27 cats were typed using URA5 restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis (RFLP), PCR finger

129 h a small subunit rRNA-based PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis and a 60-kDa glyco

130 genotype was determined by both restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis and phylogenetic a

131 osition was assessed by terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis and pyrotag sequen

132 Restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis and RNA gel blots

133 Terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis and sequencing dis

134 a in France were analyzed by PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis and sequencing of

135 in A (ompA) gene sequencing, and restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis are currently used

136 he banding patterns generated from amplified fragment length polymorphism analysis but not in their D

137 ts (MIRU-VNTR), and IS6110-based restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis cumulatively suppo

138 lysis, and sequencing as well as restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis for identifying po

139 s or a polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis in 160 individuals

140 ped by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis in 58 white patien

141 mic by polymerase chain reaction/restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis in all samples fro

142 polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of 60 human DNA sa

143 Restriction-fragment length polymorphism analysis of human isolates

144 roborated by methylation-sensitive amplified fragment length polymorphism analysis of meristem DNA.

145 med DNA sequencing and PCR-based restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of several putativ

146 f isolates was determined by PCR restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of the 18S rRNA an

147 The assay agreed with PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of the Cryptospori

148 the TIGR4 genetic background by restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of the whole locus

149 PCR and restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis reconfirmed the pr

150 monocytogenes by serotyping and restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis using pulsed-field

151 IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis was performed for

152 Restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis with a highly poly

153 variation of methylation-sensitive amplified fragment length polymorphism analysis, was used to inves

154 , and for RSTs by nested PCR and restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.

155 p-specific LGV real-time PCR and restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.

156 owed by species-specific PCR and restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.

157 by direct PCR amplification and restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.

158 ain reaction (PCR), or PCR-based restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.

159 of T. gondii infection based on restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.

160 ntional methods and confirmed by restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.

161 e polymorphisms were detected by restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.

162 ied by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.

163 Isolates underwent IS6110-based restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.

164 DNA was analyzed using terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism and 16S pyrotag sequencing,

165 using polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism and 5'-end [gamma-P] ATP-la

166 hese predictions were tested using amplified fragment length polymorphism and chloroplast markers to

167 We present amplified fragment length polymorphism and mtDNA datasets for the

168 ontrol samples were genotyped by restriction fragment length polymorphism and multilocus sequence typ

169 s had the same 16S ribosomal DNA restriction fragment length polymorphism and often had the same patt

170 ng a large number of markers using amplified fragment length polymorphism and representational differ

171 yzed and compared using terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism and sequence analyses of th

172 insertion sequence 6110 (IS6110) restriction fragment length polymorphism and spoligotype patterns id

173 We developed a terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism assay (TRFLP) for g23, the

174 sing a polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism assay and for the presence

175 r a conventional PCR method (PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism assay), were performed on e

176 select loci is demonstrated in an amplified fragment length polymorphism dataset generated from the

177 ogical precautions, will result in amplified fragment length polymorphism datasets with reduced error

178 arkers that can be generated in an amplified fragment length polymorphism experiment.

179 three humic lakes using terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism fingerprinting of the prote

180 Using an amplified fragment length polymorphism fingerprinting technique wi

181 8S rRNA tag sequencing, terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism fingerprinting, and cloning

182 ted by polymerase chain reaction restriction fragment length polymorphism for polymorphisms in 10 gen

183 We then studied the accuracy of restriction fragment length polymorphism for the -308 site using DNA

184 sed on distinct ribosomal spacer restriction fragment length polymorphism genotypes (RSTs).

185 lassification was done by IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism genotyping and spoligotypin

186 rs was established by karyotyping, amplified fragment length polymorphism genotyping, and whole-genom

187 ify the three markers by PCR and restriction fragment length polymorphism in parallel, analyzed B. bu

188 Amplified fragment length polymorphism is a popular DNA marker tec

189 studies, were examined by using restriction fragment length polymorphism IS6110 fingerprinting and r

190 criminating the four-band IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism isolates from each other.

191 We identified one amplified fragment length polymorphism marker that may be linked t

192 he previous high-density map using amplified fragment length polymorphism markers.

193 h with direct sequencing and the restriction fragment length polymorphism method indicated that the S

194 her genetic diversity of mtDNA and amplified fragment length polymorphism of Acomys on the AS compare

195 l alleles were demonstrated with restriction fragment length polymorphism of polymerase chain reactio

196 PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism of small subunit rDNA, clon

197 DNA sequencing and restriction fragment length polymorphism of the PCR products showed

198 le for PCR checking, SNP typing (restriction fragment length polymorphism or amplification refractory

199 Its IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism pattern was identical or ne

200 the 37% of isolates displaying a restriction fragment length polymorphism pattern with <6 IS6110 copi

201 nts whose isolates had identical restriction fragment length polymorphism patterns and spoligotypes w

202 of each subgroup share the same restriction fragment length polymorphism patterns of the 5S-23S inte

203 patient isolates showed unusual restriction fragment length polymorphism patterns with restriction e

204 d leukocytes and analyzed with a restriction fragment length polymorphism PCR method.

205 We devised a PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism screen for the associated g

206 A random amplified fragment length polymorphism survey suggested remodeling

207 ng the polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism technique (PCR-RFLP).

208 e used polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism to evaluate genetic polymor

209 ctors, ribosomal RNA gene spacer restriction fragment length polymorphism types (RSTs), ospC group de

210 patibility complex class II DRB3 restriction fragment length polymorphism types 8/23, 3/16, and 16/27

211 SNPs, we designed a low-cost PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism typing method.

212 of 46 heterozygotes analyzed by restriction fragment length polymorphism were actually GG-homozygote

213 hese two strains, when analyzed by amplified fragment length polymorphism within a collection of over

214 trifers (assessed using terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism) was interactively regulate

215 techniques such as cDNA-AFLP (Amplification Fragment Length Polymorphism).

216 lysis of this gene (16S rRNA PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism).

217 ed, on the basis of biochemical, restriction fragment length polymorphism, and 16S rRNA gene sequence

218 ted by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism, and CCR5Delta32, evaluated

219 xins A, B and binary toxin using restriction fragment length polymorphism, and identification of ribo

220 matched (by spoligotype, IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism, and mycobacterial interspe

221 thods, including pyrosequencing, restriction fragment length polymorphism, and sequencing to characte

222 random amplified polymorphic DNA, amplified fragment length polymorphism, and vacA allele molecular

223 4 nucleotide variant was done by restriction fragment length polymorphism, heteroduplex analysis, or

224 hyroid FNAB specimens by PCR and restriction fragment length polymorphism, plus direct sequencing in

225 By PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism, sequence, and phylogenetic

226 molecular typing methods, IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism, spoligotyping, and DNA seq

227 ial community analyses (terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism, T-RFLP) were performed to

228 ods based on cDNA sequencing and restriction fragment length polymorphism, the microarray approaches

229 18) polymorphisms, determined by restriction fragment length polymorphism, was used as the diagnostic

230 ce of the A1 allele of the TaqIA restriction fragment length polymorphism, which is associated with d

231 assigned by a combination of PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism-based assays.

232 underwent CD14 genotyping using restriction fragment length polymorphism-polymerase chain reaction.

233 yzed by pyrosequencing or by PCR restriction fragment length polymorphism.

234 Tissue typing was based on restriction fragment length polymorphism.

235 otyping by analysis with PCR and restriction fragment length polymorphism.

236 ne (pfATP6) were assessed by PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism.

237 ped by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism.

238 ned by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism.

239 454 pyrosequencing and terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism.

240 community composition (Terminal Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism; T-RFLP).

241 Amplified fragment-length polymorphism (AFLP) analysis of the isol

242 With amplified fragment-length polymorphism (AFLP) markers and controll

243 s strains associated with IS6110 restriction fragment-length polymorphism (RFLP) pattern clusters and

244 Isolates were genotyped using restriction-fragment-length polymorphism (RFLP) patterns.

245 996-2001 were fingerprinted with restriction fragment-length polymorphism (RFLP).

246 Results of IS6110 restriction fragment-length polymorphism analyses were available for

247 nce (ITS) and mitochondrial cox1 Restriction fragment-length polymorphism analysis of ITS revealed sw

248 s of a polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment-length polymorphism analysis of the 16S-23S rib

249 used spoligotyping, IS6110-based restriction fragment-length polymorphism analysis, and sequencing of

250 went insertion sequence (IS)6110 restriction-fragment-length polymorphism analysis, targeted gene seq

251 between these variants using PCR/restriction fragment-length polymorphism assays in 454 subjects recr

252 Ninety maize restriction fragment-length polymorphism core markers were hybridize

253 subunit 2 (ND2) sequences and 467 amplified fragment-length polymorphism nuclear DNA markers, we sho

254 Genotyping was performed by restriction fragment-length polymorphism polymerase chain reaction a

255 isolates were analyzed, both by restriction fragment-length polymorphism typing and by sequencing fo

256 Fluorescent amplified fragment-length polymorphism typing established that no

257 spa were found to be identical by amplified fragment-length polymorphism typing.

258 Restriction fragment-length polymorphism was used to determine the E

259 nd 10q loci were screened by PCR-restriction fragment-length polymorphism.

260 analysed by means of chloroplast restriction fragment-length polymorphism.

261 Restriction fragment length-polymorphism analysis of virus isolated

262 entical genotypes as determined by amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLP) and multilocus sequ

263 Using molecular markers [amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLP) and simple sequence

264 egant analysis, we have identified amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLP) cosegregating with

265 e map, which is based primarily on amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs) and genes, consist

266 a (Ifakara) were investigated with amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs) and microsatellite

267 ultilocus dominant markers such as amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs) and randomly ampli

268 Amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs) are widely used fo

269 ion has focused on the efficacy of amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs) for resolving deep

270 port the results of an analysis of amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs) in G. laevigata, f

271 Amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs) provide a rapid an

272 ysis of population structure using Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphisms (AFLPs) revealed no geneti

273 or chloroplast microsatellites and amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs).

274 We analysed methylation-sensitive amplified fragment length polymorphisms (MS-AFLP) to compare the e

275 lates, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs) and cytochrome oxi

276 a gave identical and distinctive restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs) for an amplified p

277 oeologous genes and anonymous cDNA amplified fragment length polymorphisms and with phenotypic variat

278 extensive SGS when assessed using amplified fragment length polymorphisms in the tree Fagus sylvatic

279 ehydrogenase or to determine the restriction fragment length polymorphisms of X chromosome-linked gen

280 Furthermore, analysis of 176 amplified fragment length polymorphisms revealed significant genom

281 Fragment length polymorphisms were detected at 9 of the

282 r BsmI, ApaI, TaqI, and FokI VDR restriction fragment length polymorphisms were used for both total V

283 Immunofixation, genomic restriction fragment length polymorphisms, and pulsed field gel elec

284 f multilocus DNA sequence data and amplified fragment length polymorphisms, is that a recently disper

285 berosum, genotyped with 438 robust amplified fragment length polymorphisms.

286 s of C. burnetii are revealed by restriction fragment-length polymorphisms (RFLP).

287 tagged sites, microsatellites, and amplified fragment-length polymorphisms.

288 ges in polymerase chain reaction restriction fragment-length polymorphisms.

289 Analysis of fragment length profiles by shallow genome-wide sequenci

290 ues from capture-based data by incorporating fragment length profiles into a model of methylation ana

291 lied to this technology make use of sequence fragment length profiling or reading frame occupancy enr

292 ear genomic and microbial cfDNA over a broad fragment length range.

293 versity, typing using the differences in PCR fragment length resulting from variations in numbers of

294 are separated and distinguished according to fragment length; thus the assay is generally hampered by

295 hich moves computational complexity from DNA fragment length to fragment overlap, i.e., coverage, and

296 servation need is for management to increase fragment lengths to forestall these risks.

297 From the terminal restriction fragment length (TRFL) distribution, the authors obtaine

298 PCR fragment-length variation across the subtelomeric region

299 Recombination fragment lengths were estimated for 11 events and ranged

300 enesis has a sigmoidal dependence on heparin fragment length, with an enhancement observed for oligos