Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34599003›Full record

ReviewGenome research2021

Tagmentation-based single-cell genomics.

Andrew C Adey

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genome research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. ATAC-seq in Emerging Model Organisms: Challenges and Strategies.Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Enhancing sensitivity and versatility of Tn5-based single cell omics.Frontiers in epigenetics and epigenomics · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Andrew C AdeyDepartment of Molecular & Medical Genetics, Knight Cancer Institute, Knight Cardiovascular Institute, Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research Center, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon 97239, USA adey@ohsu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-7648-8717

Funding

Defining the epigentic landscape at single cell resolutionR35GM124704 · NIGMS · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI ADEY, ANDREW · 2017 to 2021
$2.3M
Epigenetic tools and resources for cell-type and spatial analysis of individual mammalian non-neuronal cellsR01DA047237 · NIDA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI ADEY, ANDREW · 2018 to 2020
$1.7M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA047237NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM124704
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It has been just over 10 years since the initial description of transposase-based methods to prepare high-throughput sequencing libraries, or "tagmentation," in which a hyperactive transposase is used to simultaneously fragment target DNA and append universal adapter sequences. Tagmentation effectively replaced a series of processing steps in traditional workflows with one single reaction. It is the simplicity, coupled with the high efficiency of tagmentation, that has made it a favored means of sequencing library construction and fueled a diverse range of adaptations to assay a variety of molecular properties. In recent years, this has been centered in the single-cell space with a catalog of tagmentation-based assays that have been developed, covering a substantial swath of the regulatory landscape. To date, there have been a number of excellent reviews on single-cell technologies structured around the molecular properties that can be profiled. This review is instead framed around the central components and properties of tagmentation and how they have enabled the development of innovative molecular tools to probe the regulatory landscape of single cells. Furthermore, the granular specifics on cell throughput or richness of data provided by the extensive list of individual technologies are not discussed. Such metrics are rapidly changing and highly sample specific and are better left to studies that directly compare technologies for assays against one another in a rigorously controlled framework. The hope for this review is that, in laying out the diversity of molecular techniques at each stage of these assay platforms, new ideas may arise for others to pursue that will further advance the field of single-cell genomics.

Indexed as

GenomicsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingSingle-Cell AnalysisTransposasesDNADNATransposases

Identifiers

PMID34599003
PMCPMC8494221

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.