Pooled genetic perturbation screens with image-based phenotypes

David Feldman, Luke Funk, Anna Le, Rebecca J. Carlson, Michael D. Leiken, FuNien Tsai, Brian Soong, Avtar Singh, Paul C. Blainey

Published: 2022-01-11 DOI: 10.1038/s41596-021-00653-8

Supplementary information

Supplementary Table 1. Spreadsheet calculator for estimating the scale of an optical pooled screen. Supplementary Table 2. Oligo pool dialout primer sequences. Supplementary Table 3. Primer sequences for NGS library preparation. Supplementary Table 4. Oligo sequences for in situ amplification of sgRNA sequences.

In vitro reconstitution of COPII vesicles fromArabidopsis thalianasuspension-cultured cells

Anaerobic cryoEM protocols for air-sensitive nitrogenase proteins

Monomicellar assembly to synthesize structured and functional mesoporous carbonaceous nanomaterials

An optimized culture system for efficient derivation of porcine expanded potential stem cells from preimplantation embryos and by reprogramming somatic cells

Measuring DNA modifications with the comet assay: a compendium of protocols

Design and build of small-scale magnetic soft-bodied robots with multimodal locomotion

A practical guide to scanning light-field microscopy with digital adaptive optics

Reproducible mass spectrometry data processing and compound annotation in MZmine 3

Genetic in vivo engineering of human T lymphocytes in mouse models

Digital postprocessing and image segmentation for objective analysis of colorimetric reactions

查看全部

Sections

Figures

References

Supplementary information

Lahav, G. et al. Dynamics of the p53–Mdm2 feedback loop in individual cells. Nat. Genet. 36, 147–150 (2004).
Shalem, O. et al. Genome-scale CRISPR-Cas9 knockout screening in human cells. Science 343, 84–87 (2014).
Wang, T., Wei, J. J., Sabatini, D. M. & Lander, E. S. Genetic screens in human cells using the CRISPR–Cas9 system. Science 343, 80–84 (2014).
Joung, J. et al. Genome-scale CRISPR–Cas9 knockout and transcriptional activation screening. Nat. Protoc. 12, 828–863 (2017).
Parnas, O. et al. A genome-wide CRISPR screen in primary immune cells to dissect regulatory networks. Cell 162, 675–686 (2015).
Dixit, A. et al. Perturb-Seq: dissecting molecular circuits with scalable single-cell RNA profiling of pooled genetic screens. Cell 167, 1853–1866.e17 (2016).
Adamson, B. et al. A multiplexed single-cell CRISPR screening platform enables systematic dissection of the unfolded protein response. Cell 167, 1867–1882.e21 (2016).
Jaitin, D. A. et al. Dissecting immune circuits by linking CRISPR-pooled screens with single-cell RNA-seq. Cell 167, 1883–1896.e15 (2016).
Wroblewska, A. et al. Protein barcodes enable high-dimensional single-cell CRISPR screens. Cell 175, 1141–1155.e16 (2018).
Rubin, A. J. et al. Coupled single-cell CRISPR screening and epigenomic profiling reveals causal gene regulatory networks. Cell 176, 361–376.e17 (2019).
Mimitou, E. P. et al. Multiplexed detection of proteins, transcriptomes, clonotypes and CRISPR perturbations in single cells. Nat. Methods 16, 409–412 (2019).
Dhainaut, M. et al. Perturb-map enables CRISPR genomics with spatial resolution and identifies regulators of tumor immune composition. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.13.451021 (2021).
Neumann, B. et al. Phenotypic profiling of the human genome by time-lapse microscopy reveals cell division genes. Nature 464, 721–727 (2010).
Collinet, C. et al. Systems survey of endocytosis by multiparametric image analysis. Nature 464, 243–249 (2010).
Orvedahl, A. et al. Image-based genome-wide siRNA screen identifies selective autophagy factors. Nature 480, 113–117 (2011).
Karlas, A. et al. Genome-wide RNAi screen identifies human host factors crucial for influenza virus replication. Nature 463, 818–822 (2010).
Mercer, J. et al. RNAi screening reveals proteasome- and Cullin3-dependent stages in vaccinia virus infection. Cell Rep. 2, 1036–1047 (2012).
Agaisse, H. et al. Genome-wide RNAi screen for host factors required for intracellular bacterial infection. Science 309, 1248–1251 (2005).
Saka, S. K. et al. Immuno-SABER enables highly multiplexed and amplified protein imaging in tissues. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 1080–1090 (2019).
Codeluppi, S. et al. Spatial organization of the somatosensory cortex revealed by osmFISH. Nat. Methods 15, 932–935 (2018).
Lin, J.-R., Fallahi-Sichani, M. & Sorger, P. K. Highly multiplexed imaging of single cells using a high-throughput cyclic immunofluorescence method. Nat. Commun. 6, 8390 (2015).
Gut, G., Herrmann, M. D. & Pelkmans, L. Multiplexed protein maps link subcellular organization to cellular states. Science 361, (2018).
Regot, S., Hughey, J. J., Bajar, B. T., Carrasco, S. & Covert, M. W. High-sensitivity measurements of multiple kinase activities in live single cells. Cell 157, 1724–1734 (2014).
Hochbaum, D. R. et al. All-optical electrophysiology in mammalian neurons using engineered microbial rhodopsins. Nat. Methods 11, 825–833 (2014).
Zhao, Y. et al. An expanded palette of genetically encoded Ca2+ indicators. Science 333, 1888–1891 (2011).
Lin, M. Z. & Schnitzer, M. J. Genetically encoded indicators of neuronal activity. Nat. Neurosci. 19, 1142–1153 (2016).
Nelson, D. E. et al. Oscillations in NF-κB signaling control the dynamics of gene expression. Science 306, 704–708 (2004).
Cohen-Saidon, C., Cohen, A. A., Sigal, A., Liron, Y. & Alon, U. Dynamics and variability of ERK2 response to EGF in individual living cells. Mol. Cell 36, 885–893 (2009).
Albeck, J. G., Mills, G. B. & Brugge, J. S. Frequency-modulated pulses of ERK activity transmit quantitative proliferation signals. Mol. Cell 49, 249–261 (2013).
Biederer, T. & Scheiffele, P. Mixed-culture assays for analyzing neuronal synapse formation. Nat. Protoc. 2, 670–676 (2007).
Scheiffele, P., Fan, J., Choih, J., Fetter, R. & Serafini, T. Neuroligin expressed in nonneuronal cells triggers presynaptic development in contacting axons. Cell 101, 657–669 (2000).
Varadarajan, N. et al. A high-throughput single-cell analysis of human CD8+ T cell functions reveals discordance for cytokine secretion and cytolysis. J. Clin. Invest. 121, 4322–4331 (2011).
Moen, E. et al. Deep learning for cellular image analysis. Nat. Methods 16, 1233–1246 (2019).
Grys, B. T. et al. Machine learning and computer vision approaches for phenotypic profiling. J. Cell Biol. 216, 65–71 (2016).
Caicedo, J. C. et al. Data-analysis strategies for image-based cell profiling. Nat. Methods 14, 849–863 (2017).
Caicedo, J. C., McQuin, C., Goodman, A., Singh, S. & Carpenter, A. E. Weakly supervised learning of single-cell feature embeddings. Proc. IEEE Comput. Soc. Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit. 2018, 9309–9318 (2018).
Kobayashi, H., Cheveralls, K. C., Leonetti, M. D. & Royer, L. A. Self-supervised deep-learning encodes high-resolution features of protein subcellular localization. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.29.437595 (2021).
Strezoska, Ž. et al. High-content analysis screening for cell cycle regulators using arrayed synthetic crRNA libraries. J. Biotechnol. 251, 189–200 (2017).
Kim, H. S. et al. Arrayed CRISPR screen with image-based assay reliably uncovers host genes required for coxsackievirus infection. Genome Res 28, 859–868 (2018).
de Groot, R., Lüthi, J., Lindsay, H., Holtackers, R. & Pelkmans, L. Large-scale image-based profiling of single-cell phenotypes in arrayed CRISPR–Cas9 gene perturbation screens. Mol. Syst. Biol. 14, e8064 (2018).
Michlits, G. et al. CRISPR-UMI: single-cell lineage tracing of pooled CRISPR–Cas9 screens. Nat. Methods 14, 1191–1197 (2017).
Schmierer, B. et al. CRISPR/Cas9 screening using unique molecular identifiers. Mol. Syst. Biol. 13, 945 (2017).
Ke, R. et al. In situ sequencing for RNA analysis in preserved tissue and cells. Nat. Methods 10, 857–860 (2013).
Larsson, C., Grundberg, I., Söderberg, O. & Nilsson, M. In situ detection and genotyping of individual mRNA molecules. Nat. Methods 7, 395–397 (2010).
Feldman, D. et al. Optical pooled screens in human cells. Cell 179, 787–799.e17 (2019).
Funk, L. et al. The phenotypic landscape of essential human genes. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.28.470116 (2021).
Lawson, M. J. et al. In situ genotyping of a pooled strain library after characterizing complex phenotypes. Mol. Syst. Biol. 13, 947 (2017).
Camsund, D. et al. Time-resolved imaging-based CRISPRi screening. Nat. Methods 17, 86–92 (2020).
Emanuel, G., Moffitt, J. R. & Zhuang, X. High-throughput, image-based screening of pooled genetic-variant libraries. Nat. Methods 14, 1159–1162 (2017).
Wang, C., Lu, T., Emanuel, G., Babcock, H. P. & Zhuang, X. Imaging-based pooled CRISPR screening reveals regulators of lncRNA localization. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 10842–10851 (2019).
Datlinger, P. et al. Pooled CRISPR screening with single-cell transcriptome readout. Nat. Methods 14, 297–301 (2017).
Hasle, N. et al. High-throughput, microscope-based sorting to dissect cellular heterogeneity. Mol. Syst. Biol. 16, e9442 (2020).
Yan, X. et al. High-content imaging-based pooled CRISPR screens in mammalian cells. J. Cell Biol. 220, (2021).
Lee, J. et al. Versatile phenotype-activated cell sorting. Sci. Adv. 6, eabb7438 (2020).
Kanfer, G. et al. Image-based pooled whole-genome CRISPRi screening for subcellular phenotypes. J. Cell Biol. 220, (2021).
Wheeler, E. C. et al. Pooled CRISPR screens with imaging on microraft arrays reveals stress granule-regulatory factors. Nat. Methods 17, 636–642 (2020).
Stringer, C., Wang, T., Michaelos, M. & Pachitariu, M. Cellpose: a generalist algorithm for cellular segmentation. Nat. Methods 18, 100–106 (2021).
McQuin, C. et al. CellProfiler 3.0: next-generation image processing for biology. PLOS Biol. 16, e2005970 (2018).
Reicher, A., Koren, A. & Kubicek, S. Pooled protein tagging, cellular imaging, and in situ sequencing for monitoring drug action in real time. Genome Res. 30, 1846–1855 (2020).
Feldman, D., Singh, A., Garrity, A. J. & Blainey, P. C. Lentiviral co-packaging mitigates the effects of intermolecular recombination and multiple integrations in pooled genetic screens. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/262121 (2018).
Schindelin, J. et al. Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 676–682 (2012).
Edelstein, A. D. et al. Advanced methods of microscope control using μManager software. J. Biol. Methods 1, e10 (2014).
Schmid-Burgk, J. L. et al. Highly parallel profiling of Cas9 variant specificity. Mol. Cell 78, 794–800.e8 (2020).
Feldman, D. & Funk, L. Pooled genetic perturbation screens with image-based phenotypes, OpticalPooledScreens. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5002684 (2021).
Kosuri, S. et al. Scalable gene synthesis by selective amplification of DNA pools from high-fidelity microchips. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 1295–1299 (2010).
Doench, J. G. et al. Rational design of highly active sgRNAs for CRISPR-Cas9–mediated gene inactivation. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 1262–1267 (2014).
Kutner, R. H., Zhang, X.-Y. & Reiser, J. Production, concentration and titration of pseudotyped HIV-1-based lentiviral vectors. Nat. Protoc. 4, 495–505 (2009).
Köster, J. & Rahmann, S. Snakemake—a scalable bioinformatics workflow engine. Bioinformatics 28, 2520–2522 (2012).
Williams, E. et al. Image Data Resource: a bioimage data integration and publication platform. Nat. Methods 14, 775–781 (2017).
Luo, B. et al. Highly parallel identification of essential genes in cancer cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 20380–20385 (2008).
Li, W. et al. MAGeCK enables robust identification of essential genes from genome-scale CRISPR/Cas9 knockout screens. Genome Biol. 15, 554 (2014).

Pooled genetic perturbation screens with image-based phenotypes

Supplementary information

推荐阅读