2019
DOI: 10.1038/s41592-019-0361-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Single-cell chromatin immunocleavage sequencing (scChIC-seq) to profile histone modification

Abstract: We report a single-cell chromatin immunocleavage sequencing (scChIC-seq) methodology for analyzing histone modifications, which involves targeting of the micrococcal nuclease (MNase) by tethering it to an antibody and selective PCR amplification of cleaved target sites. We show that the protocol reliably detects the H3K4me3 and H3K27me3 target sites in single human white blood cells (WBC), resulting data for successful identification of unique blood cell types based on clustering analysis.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
108
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 152 publications
(111 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
(25 reference statements)
2
108
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Importantly, the mock controls, in which no chromatin was present, did not show any recovery for either the To evaluate the results of the optimized microfluidic ChIP procedure, we compared our results to conventional ChIP-qPCRs using the equivalent of 500,000 or 10,000 mESCs from a bulk mESC sonicated sample as input. In line with the fact that that lower input quantities affect the efficiency of ChIPs (Kidder et al 2011;Ku et al 2019), we observed a 5-fold reduction in recovery in conventional bench ChIP-qPCRs performed using 10,000 mESCs as compared to the ChIP-qPCRs performed using 500,000 mESCs ( Fig. 2f, left part labeled 1-3).…”
Section: Microfluidic Chip Is Sensitive and Robustsupporting
confidence: 76%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Importantly, the mock controls, in which no chromatin was present, did not show any recovery for either the To evaluate the results of the optimized microfluidic ChIP procedure, we compared our results to conventional ChIP-qPCRs using the equivalent of 500,000 or 10,000 mESCs from a bulk mESC sonicated sample as input. In line with the fact that that lower input quantities affect the efficiency of ChIPs (Kidder et al 2011;Ku et al 2019), we observed a 5-fold reduction in recovery in conventional bench ChIP-qPCRs performed using 10,000 mESCs as compared to the ChIP-qPCRs performed using 500,000 mESCs ( Fig. 2f, left part labeled 1-3).…”
Section: Microfluidic Chip Is Sensitive and Robustsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…Low-input cell numbers affect sensitivity of ChIPs (Kidder et al 2011;Ku et al 2019), which is clear in the current study from the H3K4me3 average profiles ( Fig S8).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 59%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…3C), single cell cleavage under targets and tagmentation (scCUT&Tag) (Kaya-Okur et al, 2019) ( Fig. 3D), and single cell chromatin immunocleavage followed by sequencing (scChIC-seq) (Ku et al, 2019) (Fig. 3E).…”
Section: Box 1 Metrics Of Single Cell Technologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The recent development of single-cell methods to study the epigenome enables the appreciation of the heterogeneity of chromatin features within a population, which cannot be assessed using bulk ATAC-seq or ChIP-seq method. Such methods include scChIP-seq (Grosselin et al, 2019;Rotem et al, 2015), scChIL-seq (Harada et al, 2019), scChIC-seq (Ku et al, 2019) and scCUT&Tag (Kaya-Okur et al, 2019) which identify genomic regions enriched for repressive or active histone marks (H3K27me3, H3K4me3, ...) and scATACseq (Chen et al, 2018;Cusanovich et al, 2015;Lareau et al, 2019) which assesses regions of open chromatin. There are existing tools publicly available to analyze scATAC-seq such as chromVar (Schep et al, 2017), Cicero (Pliner et al, 2018) or Scasat (Baker et al, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%