Genome-Wide Detection of Single Nucleotide and Copy Number Variations of a Single Human Cell

By Chenghang Zong, Sijia Lu, Alec R. Chapman, Xiaohui S. Xie. Science, 2012

1,027 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Single-Cell Sequencing With the rapid progress in sequencing technologies, single-cell sequencing is now possible, promising insight into how cell-to-cell heterogeneity affects biological behavior. Achieving adequate genome coverage remains a challenge because single-cell sequencing relies on genome amplification that is prone to sequence bias. Zong et al. (p. 1622) report a new amplification method: multiple annealing and looping-based amplification cycles that allowed 93% genome coverage for a human cell. This coverage facilitated accurate detection of point mutations and copy number variations. Lu et al. (p. 1627) used the method to sequence 99 sperm cells from a single individual. Mapping the meiotic crossovers revealed a nonrandom distribution with a reduced recombination rate near transcription start sites. A whole-genome amplification method with reduced bias compares a single cell with its descendants. Kindred cells can have different genomes because of dynamic changes in DNA. Single-cell sequencing is needed to characterize these genomic differences but has been hindered by whole-genome amplification bias, resulting in low genome coverage. Here, we report on a new amplification method—multiple annealing and looping-based amplification cycles (MALBAC)—that offers high uniformity across the genome. Sequencing MALBAC-amplified DNA achieves 93% genome coverage ≥1x for a single human cell at 25x mean sequencing depth. We detected digitized copy-number variations (CNVs) of a single cancer cell. By sequencing three kindred cells, we were able to identify individual single-nucleotide variations (SNVs), with no false positives detected. We directly measured the genome-wide mutation rate of a cancer cell line and found that purine-pyrimidine exchanges occurred unusually frequently among the newly acquired SNVs.

Subfields: Cancer Research, Genetics, Molecular Biology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f3d379bbcc277d9fbcfd06fd466d2f42054acd31

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cancer Research

  1. John C. Marioni
  2. Sarah A. Teichmann
  3. Valentine Svensson
  4. Dominic Grün
  5. Alexander van Oudenaarden
  6. Fabian J Theis
  7. Malte D. Luecken
  8. Rahul Satija

In Genetics

  1. John C. Marioni
  2. J. Gregory Caporaso
  3. Ruth E. Ley
  4. Dominic Grün
  5. Rob Knight
  6. Sarah A. Teichmann
  7. Valentine Svensson
  8. Alexander van Oudenaarden

In Molecular Biology

  1. Rob Knight
  2. John C. Marioni
  3. J. Gregory Caporaso
  4. Ruth E. Ley
  5. William Walters
  6. Sarah A. Teichmann
  7. Omry Koren
  8. Valentine Svensson

Citations in the corpus