Are 100,000 "SNPs" useless?

doi:10.1126/science.298.5598.1509a

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Community

Back to search

Article

Are 100,000 "SNPs" useless?

Science (New York, N.Y.) - 22 Nov 2002

Hurles Matthew

Abstract excerpt

No abstract is available from the source.

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Alleles
Share to Artifacts
Share to Chromosomes, Human
Share to Databases, Nucleic Acid

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy Delete account & data About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to Gene Conversion

Share to Gene Duplication

Share to Genome, Human

Share to Haplotypes

Source

Open in PubMed

Identifiers

PMID: 12446872
DOI: 10.1126/science.298.5598.1509a

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 7 Sept 2026. Manifest publication-graph-cohort-2026-09-08.1.

Source receipt: pubmed, retrieved 7 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Are 100,000 "SNPs" useless?PMID 12446872Read ↗

Snapping up SNPs.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Genetics. SNPs, silent but not invisible.Semantic proximity Read ↗

The essence of SNPs.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Bioinformatics: SNPs while you wait.Semantic proximity Read ↗

SNPs: why do we care?Semantic proximity Read ↗

Weeding out bad alleles.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Why are some deleterious genes so common?Semantic proximity Read ↗

Recovering unused information in genome-wide association studies: the benefit of analyzing SNPs out of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium.Semantic proximity Read ↗

The causality of de novo copy number variants is overestimatedSemantic proximity Read ↗

Sequence- vs. chip-assisted genomic selection: accurate biological information is advised.Semantic proximity Read ↗

SNPs in genes with copy number variation: a question of specificity.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Classic genome-wide association methods are unlikely to identify causal variants in strongly clonal microbial populationsSemantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.