4.8 Article

Functional single-cell genomics of human cytomegalovirus infection

期刊

NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY
卷 40, 期 3, 页码 391-+

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41587-021-01059-3

关键词

-

资金

  1. EMBO long-term postdoctoral fellowship [EMBO ALTF 1193-2015]
  2. European Commission FP7, Marie Curie Actions [LTFCOFUND2013, GA-2013-609409]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding the roles of viral and host factors in human cytomegalovirus infection was explored using CRISPR interference and nuclease screening. The study revealed how perturbations of critical host and viral factors can alter the progression and timing of infection. Results showed that perturbing host factors can impact the stage of infection, while perturbation of viral factors can lead to distinct infection trajectories.
Understanding how viral and host factors interact and how perturbations impact infection is the basis for designing antiviral interventions. Here we define the functional contribution of each viral and host factor involved in human cytomegalovirus infection in primary human fibroblasts through pooled CRISPR interference and nuclease screening. To determine how genetic perturbation of critical host and viral factors alters the timing, course and progression of infection, we applied Perturb-seq to record the transcriptomes of tens of thousands of CRISPR-modified single cells and found that, normally, most cells follow a stereotypical transcriptional trajectory. Perturbing critical host factors does not change the stereotypical transcriptional trajectory per se but can stall, delay or accelerate progression along the trajectory, allowing one to pinpoint the stage of infection at which host factors act. Conversely, perturbation of viral factors can create distinct, abortive trajectories. Our results reveal the roles of host and viral factors and provide a roadmap for the dissection of host-pathogen interactions. Pooled and single-cell CRISPR screens provide a detailed map of human cytomegalovirus infection.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据