Submit a comment
Abstract
New techniques for single-cell analysis have led to insights into hematopoiesis and the immune system, but the ability of these techniques to cross-validate and reproducibly identify the biological variation in diverse human samples is currently unproven. We therefore performed a comprehensive assessment of human bone marrow cells using both single-cell RNA sequencing and multiparameter flow cytometry from 20 healthy adult human donors across a broad age range. These data characterize variation between healthy donors as well as age-associated changes in cell population frequencies. Direct comparison of techniques revealed discrepancy in the quantification of T lymphocyte and natural killer cell populations. Orthogonal validation of immunophenotyping using mass cytometry demonstrated a strong correlation with flow cytometry. Technical replicates using single-cell RNA sequencing matched robustly, while biological replicates showed variation. Given the increasing use of single-cell technologies in translational research, this resource serves as an important reference data set and highlights opportunities for further refinement.
Authors
Karolyn A. Oetjen, Katherine E. Lindblad, Meghali Goswami, Gege Gui, Pradeep K. Dagur, Catherine Lai, Laura W. Dillon, J. Philip McCoy, Christopher S. Hourigan
Guidelines
The Editorial Board will only consider comments that are deemed relevant and of interest to readers. The Journal will not post data that have not been subjected to peer review; or a comment that is essentially a reiteration of another comment.
- Comments appear on the Journal’s website and are linked from the original article’s web page.
- Authors are notified by email if their comments are posted.
- The Journal reserves the right to edit comments for length and clarity.
- No appeals will be considered.
- Comments are not indexed in PubMed.
Specific requirements
- Maximum length, 400 words
- Entered as plain text or HTML
- Author’s name and email address, to be posted with the comment
- Declaration of all potential conflicts of interest (even if these are not ultimately posted); see the Journal’s conflict-of-interest policy
- Comments may not include figures
