4.8 Article

Optical Pooled Screens in Human Cells

Journal

CELL
Volume 179, Issue 3, Pages 787-+

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2019.09.016

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Simons Center Seed Grant from MIT
  2. Broad Institute
  3. BN10 program
  4. National Human Genome Research Institute [HG009283, HG006193]
  5. Burroughs Wellcome Fund
  6. NIH [1R01-HG009761, 1R01-MH110049, 1DP1-HL141201]
  7. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  8. New York Stem Cell Foundation
  9. Simons Foundation
  10. Paul G. Allen Family Foundation
  11. Vallee Foundation
  12. Poitras Center for Affective Disorders Research at MIT
  13. Hock E. Tan and K. Lisa Yang Center for Autism Research at MIT
  14. Swedish Research Council [2015-06403]
  15. Fannie and John Hertz Foundation Fellowship
  16. NSF Graduate Research Fellowship
  17. EMBO Long-Term Fellowship [ALTF 199-2017]
  18. Swedish Research Council [2015-06403] Funding Source: Swedish Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Genetic screens are critical for the systematic identification of genes underlying cellular phenotypes. Pooling gene perturbations greatly improves scalability but is not compatible with imaging of complex and dynamic cellular phenotypes. Here, we introduce a pooled approach for optical genetic screens in mammalian cells. We use targeted in situ sequencing to demultiplex a library of genetic perturbations following image-based phenotyping. We screened a set of 952 genes across millions of cells for involvement in nuclear factor kB (NF-kappa B) signaling by imaging the translocation of RelA (p65) to the nucleus. Screening at a single time point across 3 cell lines recovered 15 known pathway components, while repeating the screen with live-cell imaging revealed a role for Mediator complex subunits in regulating the duration of p65 nuclear retention. These results establish a highly multiplexed approach to imagebased screens of spatially and temporally defined phenotypes with pooled libraries.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available