4.5 Article

Single-cell transcriptomics unveils gene regulatory network plasticity

期刊

GENOME BIOLOGY
卷 20, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13059-019-1713-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. Spanish Institute of Health Carlos III (ISCIII) [CP14/00229]
  2. Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovacion y Universidades [SAF2017-89109-P]
  3. AEI/FEDER, UE
  4. ISCIII
  5. Generalitat de Catalunya
  6. Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness(MEIC)
  7. Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa
  8. CERCA Programme/Generalitat de Catalunya
  9. Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness (MEIC) through the Instituto de Salud Carlos III
  10. Generalitat de Catalunya through Departament deSalut and Departament d'Empresa i Coneixement
  11. Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness (MEIC)
  12. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundSingle-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) plays a pivotal role in our understanding of cellular heterogeneity. Current analytical workflows are driven by categorizing principles that consider cells as individual entities and classify them into complex taxonomies.ResultsWe devise a conceptually different computational framework based on a holistic view, where single-cell datasets are used to infer global, large-scale regulatory networks. We develop correlation metrics that are specifically tailored to single-cell data, and then generate, validate, and interpret single-cell-derived regulatory networks from organs and perturbed systems, such as diabetes and Alzheimer's disease. Using tools from graph theory, we compute an unbiased quantification of a gene's biological relevance and accurately pinpoint key players in organ function and drivers of diseases.ConclusionsOur approach detects multiple latent regulatory changes that are invisible to single-cell workflows based on clustering or differential expression analysis, significantly broadening the biological insights that can be obtained with this leading technology.

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

4.5
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