Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

0 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

ABSTRACT: Test kits for biocorrosion

PROVIDER: PRJNA545595 | ENA |

REPOSITORIES: ENA

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Dataset's files

Source:

			Action	DRS
	SRR9186190_1.fastq.gz	Fastqsanger.gz
	SRR9186190_2.fastq.gz	Fastqsanger.gz
	SRR9186200_1.fastq.gz	Fastqsanger.gz
	SRR9186200_2.fastq.gz	Fastqsanger.gz
	SRR9186191_1.fastq.gz	Fastqsanger.gz

Items per page:

1 - 5 of 26

Similar Datasets

Transcriptome-wide marker gene expression analysis of stress-responsive Oleidesulfovibrio alaskensis

Project description:Sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) are terminal members of any anaerobic food chain. For example, they critically influence the biogeochemical cycling of carbon, nitrogen, sulfur, and metals (natural environment) as well as the corrosion of civil infrastructure (built environment). The United States alone spends nearly $4 billion to address the biocorrosion challenges of SRB. It is important to analyze the genetic mechanisms of these organisms under environmental stresses. The current study uses transcriptome-wide marker gene panel mapping to decipher the stress mechanisms in SRB. This project contains 3 control samples and 6 test samples of RNA-seq data of Oleidesulfovibrio alaskensis strain G20, exposed to pristine copper and graphene-coated copper.

2023-08-30 | GSE240798 | GEO

Project description:test of commercial cDNA synthesis kits for RNAseq on Illumina sequencing platform

| PRJEB6567 | ENA

Project description:Aquatic steel biocorrosion microbiomes

| PRJNA674937 | ENA

An extension to: Systematic assessment of commercially available low-input miRNA library preparation kits

Project description:We compared the performance of two commercial kits (NEBNext and NEXTflex) for miRNA detection sensitivity, reliability, titration response and ability to detect differentially expressed miRNAs at different amounts of synthetic miRNAs. We observed differences in detection sensitivity between the kits, but none were able to detect the full repertoire of expected miRNAs. The reliability within the replicates of all kits was good, while larger differences were observed between the kits, although none could accurately quantify the majority of miRNAs. In a previous publication (https://doi.org/10.1080/15476286.2019.1667741; GEO accession number GSE133719) we accessed the performance of six additional miRNA library preparation kits.

2020-05-31 | GSE141658 | GEO

Systematic assessment of commercially available low-input miRNA library preparation kits

Project description:We compared the performance of six commercial kits (QIAseq, SMARTer, CATS, CleanTag, srLp, TailorMix) capable of handling <100ng total RNA input for miRNA detection sensitivity, reliability, titration response and ability to detect differentially expressed miRNAs at different amounts of synthetic miRNAs. We observed differences in detection sensitivity between the kits, but none were able to detect the full repertoire of expected miRNAs. The reliability within the replicates of all kits was good, while larger differences were observed between the kits, although none could accurately quantify the majority of miRNAs.

2019-09-27 | GSE133719 | GEO

Comparison of RNA Isolation Methods in Yeast on RNA-Seq: Implications for Differential Expression and Meta-Analyses

Project description:Based on the different chemistries of phenol extraction of RNA versus commercial kits, we hypothesized that certain species of mRNA may be preferentially extracted depending upon method, which could masquerade as differential expression in downstream RNA-seq experiments. We tested this using Saccharomyces cerevisiae samples that only differ in the RNA isolation method: a "standard" hot phenol extraction, versus two different commercial RNA isolation kits. While the kits had comparable relative mRNA abundances, samples isolated with hot phenol had higher relative abundance of mRNAs encoding membrane proteins. We hypothesize that hot phenol better solubilizes mRNAs associated with cellular membranes. We then compared the effects of each RNA isolation method on the ability to identify differentially expressed transcripts, using the yeast heat shock response a test case. The method of RNA isolation had little effect on the ability to identify differentially expressed transcripts. Thus, experiments within a single lab are unlikely to be affected by the choice of RNA isolation method as long as the same method is used throughout an experiment. For meta-analyses however, researchers should be cautious if trying to compare experiments where the RNA isolation methods differ.

2019-08-07 | GSE135430 | GEO

test

Project description:test test

| PRJEB44966 | ENA

Project description:test test

| PRJEB53402 | ENA

Nassar2022 - Microbome nucleic acid extraction kit NER model

Project description:Microbiome nucleic acid extraction kit model is a Named Entity Recognition (NER) model that identifies and annotates the name of the kits used in extracting microbiome nucleic acids in texts. This is the final model version used to annotate metagenomics publications in Europe PMC and enrich metagenomics studies in MGnify with kits metadata from literature. For more information, please refer to the following blogs: http://blog.europepmc.org/2020/11/europe-pmc-publications-metagenomics-annotations.html https://www.ebi.ac.uk/about/news/service-news/enriched-metadata-fields-mgnify-based-text-mining-associated-publications

2022-02-21 | MODEL2202170007 | BioModels

RNA expression profiles in bile

Project description:Compare small RNA expression in bile from normal vs. cancer patients and using different kits.

2022-12-30 | GSE221255 | GEO