4.6 Article

Evaluation of genetic demultiplexing of single-cell sequencing data from model species

Journal

LIFE SCIENCE ALLIANCE
Volume 6, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

LIFE SCIENCE ALLIANCE LLC
DOI: 10.26508/lsa.202301979

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Single-cell sequencing (sc-seq) is a useful tool for studying cellular processes, but its high cost and the need for sufficient cell quantities and replicates pose challenges. One option is pooling cells from multiple individuals into one sc-seq library. In this study, we validate the application of genotype-based demultiplexing for pooled sc-seq data across non-isogenic model organisms, identifying limitations and demonstrating its potential benefits.
Single-cell sequencing (sc-seq) provides a species agnostic tool to study cellular processes. However, these technologies are expensive and require sufficient cell quantities and biological replicates to avoid artifactual results. An option to address these problems is pooling cells from multiple individuals into one sc-seq library. In humans, genotype-based computational separa-tion (i.e., demultiplexing) of pooled sc-seq samples is common. This approach would be instrumental for studying non-isogenic model organisms. We set out to determine whether genotype based demultiplexing could be more broadly applied among species ranging from zebrafish to non-human primates. Using such non-isogenic species, we benchmark genotype-based demultiplexing of pooled sc-seq datasets against various ground truths. We demonstrate that genotype-based demulti-plexing of pooled sc-seq samples can be used with confidence several non-isogenic model organisms and uncover limitations this method. Importantly, the only genomic resource required for this approach is sc-seq data and a de novo transcriptome. The incorporation of pooling into sc-seq study designs will decrease cost while simultaneously increasing the reproducibility and experimental options in non-isogenic model organisms.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available