Skip to main content
. 2013 Sep 12;14(9):R100. doi: 10.1186/gb-2013-14-9-r100

Table 1.

Comparison of different clone-based haplotyping protocols

  Kitzman et al . [11](fosmid) Suk et al . [12](fosmid) Peters et al . [13](LFR) Kaper et al .[14] Lo et al . [16](BAC)
n: Number of clones per pool
5,000
5,000
5,000 to 10,000a
16,377b
5,000
L: Exp(clone length), kbp
37
40
60
13.8
140
p: Number of pools
115
288
384
192
24
c: Exp(clone coverage) = nLpG
7.1
19.2
57.6
14.5
6.0
cp: Exp(clone coverage per pool) = nLG
0.06
0.07
0.15
0.075
0.25
PO: overlap probability = 1-e-cp,%
11.31
13.06
25.92
13.93
39.35
Exp(haplotype length), bp
2.05 × 107
4.37 × 1010
5.30 × 1016
4.89 × 109
3.42 × 105
Simulated haplotype length, bp
825,046
2,486,692
8,585,663
300,336
2,210,343
Actual haplotype length, bp 386,000 959,175 411,000c 358,000 2,640,036

Abbreviations: BAC, Bacterial artificial chromosome; LFR, LFR, Long fragment reads.

aEstimated given that each pool contains 300 to 600 Mbp and L = 94,000.

bEstimated by dividing 226 Mbp (number of bases covered in a pool) by L = 13.8 kbp.

cActual haplotype length for NA20431.