Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Comparing Copy Number Variations and SNPs

Comparing Copy Number Variations and SNPs

Sequencing of the human genome has opened up several best-kept secrets of the genome. Scientists have identified thousands of genome variations that exist within a population. These variations can be a single nucleotide or a larger chromosomal variation.
Copy number variations or CNVs are the structural variations that cover more than 1kb of DNA sequence. The single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), on the other hand, is a single nucleotide change or a point mutation that is found in more than 1%...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Genetic and maternal environmental contributions to estimated fetal weight at 20 weeks gestation compared with birthweight.

medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences·2026

Same author

Characterisation of the SMN1/2 locus using a highly specific variant caller on whole-genome sequence data from 500,000 individuals.

European journal of human genetics : EJHG·2026

Same author

Sex-differential associations of MC3R p.F45S with human metabolic profile.

Journal of neuroendocrinology·2026

Same author

Multi-ancestry, trans-generational GWAS meta-analysis of gestational diabetes and glycaemic traits during pregnancy reveals limited evidence of pregnancy-specific genetic effects.

Nature communications·2026

Same author

Impact of control selection strategies on GWAS results: a study of prostate cancer in the UK biobank.

Briefings in bioinformatics·2026

Same author

Reduced penetrance of COL1A1/2 pathogenic variants linked with osteogenesis imperfecta: analysis of a large population cohort.

European journal of human genetics : EJHG·2026

Same journal

RNU4ATAC-opathy: Clinical, molecular and transcriptomic insights from a large cohort.

Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics·2026

Same journal

Expanding the clinical spectrum of RNU4ATAC-opathies: more frequent and diverse than assumed.

Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics·2026

Same journal

Delineating the clinical and molecular spectrum of the neurodevelopmental disorder associated with SET.

Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics·2026

Same journal

KMT2A and KMT2B episignatures address diagnostic challenges associated with rare neurodevelopmental disorders.

Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics·2026

Same journal

Beyond Mistrust: Diverse Biobanking Preferences Among Parents and Adolescents with Sickle Cell Disease.

Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics·2026

Same journal

Correspondence on "Optical mapping in Black genomes: Distinct LCR22 structures and 22q11.2 deletion syndrome mechanisms" by Pastor et al.

Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics·2026

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 2, 2025

Competitive Genomic Screens of Barcoded Yeast Libraries

Competitive Genomic Screens of Barcoded Yeast Libraries

Published on: August 11, 2011

Estimating diagnostic noise in panel-based genomic analysis.

Robin N Beaumont¹, Caroline F Wright¹

¹Institute of Biomedical and Clinical Science, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.

Genetics in Medicine : Official Journal of the American College of Medical Genetics

|August 3, 2022

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Large gene panels increase variant detection but also flag benign variants. Careful interpretation is crucial, especially without clear phenotypes, for diagnosing rare genetic diseases.

Keywords:

Clinical validity Gene panels Genomic medicine Population screening Variant classification

More Related Videos

Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry

Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry

Published on: June 21, 2018

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing

Published on: August 3, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Sep 2, 2025

Competitive Genomic Screens of Barcoded Yeast Libraries

Competitive Genomic Screens of Barcoded Yeast Libraries

Published on: August 11, 2011

Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry

Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry

Published on: June 21, 2018

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing

Published on: August 3, 2018

Area of Science:

Genomics
Clinical Genetics
Population Studies

Background:

Clinical genetic analysis often uses gene panels with strict variant filtering.
Panel size impacts diagnostic sensitivity and specificity for genetic diseases.

Purpose of the Study:

Investigate the background rate of candidate variants in a population using gene panels.
Assess variant rates in panels designed for diagnosing heterogeneous monogenic diseases.

Main Methods:

Utilized UK Biobank exome data (200,643 individuals) and Gene2Phenotype database.
Employed Variant Effect Predictor to identify rare nonsynonymous variants across 5 gene panels (50-1700 genes).

Main Results:

Larger gene panels yielded more variants per person (0.3-3.5).
Variant prevalence correlated linearly with coding sequence length for monoallelic genes and quadratically for biallelic genes.

Conclusions:

While large panels maximize diagnostic yield for genetic diseases, they often prioritize benign variants.
Most individuals possess variants in large gene panels (>500 genes), necessitating cautious interpretation, especially when phenotypes are absent.