Cited by 18DNA Repair MechanismsGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics

Single-cell damagenome profiling unveils vulnerable genes and functional pathways in human genome toward DNA damage

Open access
Zhu, Qiangyuan, Niu, Yichi, Gundry, Michael, Zong, Chenghang·2021·Science Advances

Abstract

We report a novel single-cell whole-genome amplification method (LCS-WGA) that can efficiently capture spontaneous DNA damage existing in single cells. We refer to these damage-associated single-nucleotide variants as "damSNVs," and the whole-genome distribution of damSNVs as the damagenome. We observed that in single human neurons, the damagenome distribution was significantly correlated with three-dimensional genome structures. This nonuniform distribution indicates different degrees of DNA damage effects on different genes. Next, we identified the functionals that were significantly enriched in the high-damage genes. Similar functionals were also enriched in the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) detected by single-cell transcriptome of both Alzheimer's disease (AD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This result can be explained by the significant enrichment of high-damage genes in the DEGs of neurons for both AD and ASD. The discovery of high-damage genes sheds new lights on the important roles of DNA damage in human diseases and disorders.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/sciadv.abf3329

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 69 · Cited by 18

Authors
Zhu, Q., Niu, Y., Gundry, M., & Zong, C.
Affiliations
Baylor College of Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
  • Zhu, Qiangyuan
  • Niu, Yichi
  • Zong, Chenghang
Venue
Science Advances
Published
2021-07-02
Volume
7
Issue
27
ISSN
2375-2548 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3174928786
Cited by
18
References
69
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6
FWCI
1.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Science Advances (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
NIH Office of the Director (1DP2EB020399)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Keywords
DNA damage, single-cell whole genome amplification, single nucleotide variants, 3D genome organization, neurons, Alzheimer's disease, autism spectrum disorder, differentially expressed genes, gene function enrichment, human genome
MeSH terms
Autism Spectrum Disorder, Alzheimer Disease, DNA Damage, Humans, Genome, Human, Gene Expression Profiling, Transcriptome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review