2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.cels.2021.05.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Benchmarked approaches for reconstruction of in vitro cell lineages and in silico models of C. elegans and M. musculus developmental trees

Abstract: Benchmarked approaches for reconstruction of in vitro cell lineages and in silico models of C. elegans and M. musculus developmental trees Graphical abstract Highlights d We organized a DREAM challenge to benchmark methods of cell lineage reconstruction d Using experimental, in silico datasets as ground-truth trees of 10 2 , 10 3 , and 10 4 cells d Smaller trees allowed the training of a machine-learning decision tree approach d These results delineate a potential way forward for solving larger cell lineage tr… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
42
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
42
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We benchmark TiDeTree on the intMEMOIR dataset (as available during the DREAM challenge) [14, 8] by comparing it against existing methods. The data is divided into a training and a test set.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We benchmark TiDeTree on the intMEMOIR dataset (as available during the DREAM challenge) [14, 8] by comparing it against existing methods. The data is divided into a training and a test set.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We apply TiDeTree to data used in the DREAM challenge [14], generated by the intMEMOIR system [8], where the ground truth cell phylogenies are known. In the analysis we quantify the ability of TiDeTree to recover the true tree topology, tree height, tree length and phylodynamic parameters.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such stochastically evolving barcodes mark cells and enable inference of their developmental lineage relationships based on patterns of shared mutations. However, despite their promise, unordered lineage recorders remain sharply limited by several technical challenges, including: (1) a failure to explicitly record the order of editing events, which renders phylogenetic reconstruction of cell lineage highly challenging 24,25 ; (2) a reliance on doublestranded breaks (DSBs) and nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) to introduce edits; DSBs are cytotoxic and frequently delete consecutively located targets within a barcode; and (3) the number of target sites available to CRISPR-Cas9 decreases as sites are irreversibly edited, which makes it challenging to sustain a continuous rate of lineage recording throughout development.…”
Section: Ordered Recording and Decoding Of Cell Lineage Historiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, we would like to find out whether the performances of lineage reconstruction are improved by integrating gene expressions with the lineage barcodes. We compare the performance of LinTIMaT [17] against DCLEAR [41] and Cassiopeia [16] , which are the best performing algorithms in the recent Allen Institute Cell Lineage Reconstruction DREAM Challenge [41] which use only the CRISPR/Cas9 induced lineage barcodes.…”
Section: Benchmarking Lineage Reconstruction Algorithmsmentioning
confidence: 99%