Skip to content
naulon
Get started

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Nov 4, 2026.

Exploring functional protein covariation across single cells using nPOP

Andrew Leduc, R. Gray Huffman, Joshua Cantlon and 2 more

Genome Biology · 2022 · CC BY

doi:10.1101/2021.04.24.441211

Abstract

Background. Many biological processes, such as cell division cycle and drug resistance, are reflected in protein covariation across single cells. This covariation can be quantified and interpreted by single-cell mass spectrometry with sufficiently high throughput and accuracy.

Results. Here, we describe nPOP, a method that enables simultaneous sample preparation of thousands of single cells, including lysing, digesting, and labeling individual cells in volumes of 8–20 nl. nPOP uses piezo acoustic dispensing to isolate individual cells in 300 pl volumes and performs all subsequent sample preparation steps in small droplets on a fluorocarbon-coated glass slide. Protein covariation analysis identifies cell cycle dynamics that are similar and dynamics that differ between cell types, even within subpopulations of melanoma cells delineated by markers for drug resistance priming. Melanoma cells expressing these markers accumulate in the G1 phase of the cell cycle, display distinct protein covariation across the cell cycle, accumulate glycogen, and have lower abundance of glycolytic enzymes. The non-primed melanoma cells exhibit gradients of protein abundance, suggesting transition states. Within this subpopulation, proteins functioning in oxidative phosphorylation covary with each other and inversely with proteins functioning in glycolysis. This protein covariation suggests divergent reliance on energy sources and its association with other biological functions. These results are validated by different mass spectrometry methods.

Conclusions. nPOP enables flexible, automated, and highly parallelized sample preparation for single-cell proteomics. This allows for quantifying protein covariation across thousands of single cells and revealing functionally concerted biological differences between closely related cell states. Support for nPOP is available at https://scp.slavovlab.net/nPOP.

Supplementary Information. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13059-022-02817-5.

References 53

  1. 1.
    The Human Cell Atlas · 2017
    No notice
  2. 2.

    Specht H, Slavov N. Transformative opportunities for single-cell proteomics. J Proteome Res. 2018;17:2563-2916.

    Not in our library10.1021/acs.jproteome.8b00257

  3. 3.

    Ziegenhain C, et al. Comparative analysis of single-cell RNA sequencing methods. Mol Cell. 2017;65:631-643.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.molcel.2017.01.023

  4. 4.

    Slavov N. Unpicking the proteome in single cells. Science. 2020;367:512-513.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aaz6695

  5. 5.

    Slavov N. Learning from natural variation across the proteomes of single cells. PLoS Biol. 2022;20:1-4.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pbio.3001512

  6. 6.

    Shaffer SM, et al. Rare cell variability and drug-induced reprogramming as a mode of cancer drug resistance. Nature. 2017;546:431-435.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature22794

  7. 7.

    Emert BL, et al. Variability within rare cell states enables multiple paths toward drug resistance. Nat Biotechnol. 2021;39:865-876.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41587-021-00837-3

  8. 8.

    Stallaert W, et al. The structure of the human cell cycle. Cell Syst. 2022;13(3):230-240.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cels.2021.10.007

  9. 9.

    Mahdessian D, et al. Spatiotemporal dissection of the cell cycle with single-cell proteogenomics. Nature. 2021;590:649-654.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-021-03232-9

  10. 10.

    Slavov N. Scaling up single-cell proteomics. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2022;21:100179.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.mcpro.2021.100179

  11. 11.

    Slavov N. Single-cell protein analysis by mass spectrometry. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2020;60:1-9.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cbpa.2020.04.018

  12. 12.

    Vanderaa C, Gatto L. Replication of single-cell proteomics data reveals important computational challenges. Expert Rev Proteomics. 2021;18:835-843.

    Not in our library10.1080/14789450.2021.1988571

  13. 13.

    Kelly RT. Single-cell proteomics: progress and prospects. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2020;19:1739-1748.

    Not in our library10.1074/mcp.r120.002234

  14. 14.
    Single-cell proteomic and transcriptomic analysis of macrophage heterogeneity using SCoPE2 · 2021
    No notice
  15. 15.

    Singh A. Towards resolving proteomes in single cells. en. Nat Methods. 2021;18:856.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41592-021-01243-y

  16. 16.

    Li Z-Y, et al. Nanoliter-scale oil-air-droplet chip-based single cell proteomic analysis. Anal Chem. 2018;90:5430-5438.

    Not in our library10.1021/acs.analchem.8b00661

  17. 17.
    Nanodroplet processing platform for deep and quantitative proteome profiling of 10–100 mammalian cells · 2018
    No notice
  18. 18.

    Specht H, et al. Automated sample preparation for high-throughput single-cell proteomics. bioRxiv. 2018. 10.1101/399774.

    Not in our library

  19. 19.

    Ctortecka C. et al. An automated workflow for multiplexed single-cell proteomics sample preparation at unprecedented sensitivity. bioRxiv. 2021. 10.1101/2021.04.14.439828.

    Not in our library

  20. 20.

    Marx V. A dream of single-cell proteomics. Nat Methods. 2019;16:809-812.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41592-019-0540-6

  21. 21.

    Klein AM, et al. Droplet barcoding for single-cell transcriptomics applied to embryonic stem cells. Cell. 2015;161:1187-1201.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2015.04.044

  22. 22.

    Macosko EZ, et al. Highly parallel genome-wide expression profiling of individual cells using nanoliter droplets. Cell. 2015;161:1202-1214.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.002

  23. 23.

    Cong Y, et al. Ultrasensitive single-cell proteomics workflow identifies > 1000 protein groups per mammalian cell. Chem Sci. 2021;12:1001-1006.

    Not in our library10.1039/d0sc03636f

  24. 24.

    Derks J, et al. Increasing the throughput of sensitive proteomics by plexDIA. Nat Biotechnol. 2022. 10.1038/s41587-022-01389-w.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41587-022-01389-w

  25. 25.

    Petelski AA, et al. Multiplexed single-cell proteomics using SCoPE2. Nat Protoc. 2021;16:5398-5425.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41596-021-00616-z

  26. 26.

    Framework for multiplicative scaling of single-cell proteomics. en. Nat Biotechnol. 2022:1–2. 10.1038/s41587-022-01411-1.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41587-022-01411-1

  27. 27.

    Huffman RG, et al. Prioritized single-cell proteomics reveals molecular and functional polarization across primary macrophages. Nature Methods In press. bioRxiv 2022.03.16.484655. 2022. 10.1101/2022.03.16.484655.

    Not in our library

  28. 28.

    Glotzer M, Murray AW, Kirschner MW. Cyclin is degraded by the ubiquitin pathway. Nature. 1991;349:132-138.

    Not in our library10.1038/349132a0

  29. 29.
    Adaptive resistance of melanoma cells to RAF inhibition via reversible induction of a slowly dividing de‐differentiated state · 2017
    No notice
  30. 30.

    Harmange G, et al. Disrupting cellular memory to overcome drug resistance. bioRxiv. 2022. 10.1101/2022.06.16.496161.

    Not in our library

  31. 31.

    Rousset M, Chevalier G, Rousset J-P, Dussaulx E, Zweibaum A. Presence and cell growth-related variations of glycogen in human colorectal adenocarcinoma cell lines in culture. Cancer Res. 1979;39:531-534.

    Not in our library

  32. 32.

    Slavov, N. Universality, specificity and regulation of S. cerevisiae growth rate response in different carbon sources and nutrient limitations PhD thesis (Princeton University, 2010).

    Not in our library

  33. 33.

    Slavov N, Botstein D, Caudy A. Extensive regulation of metabolism and growth during the cell division cycle. bioRxiv. 2014. 10.1101/005629.

    Not in our library

  34. 34.

    Slavov N. Increasing proteomics throughput. Nat Biotechnol. 2021;39:809-810.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41587-021-00881-z

  35. 35.
    SCoPE-MS: mass spectrometry of single mammalian cells quantifies proteome heterogeneity during cell differentiation · 2018
    No notice
  36. 36.

    Leduc A, Huffman RG, Cantlon J, Khan S, Slavov N. Highly parallel droplet sample preparation for Single Cell Proteomics V.2. protocols.io. 2022.

    Not in our library

  37. 37.

    Cooper S. The synchronization manifesto: a critique of whole-culture synchronization. FEBS J. 2019;286:4650-4656.

    Not in our library10.1111/febs.15050

  38. 38.

    Cox J, Mann M. MaxQuant enables high peptide identification rates, individualized ppb range mass accuracies and proteome-wide protein quantification. Nat Biotechnol. 2008;26:1367-1372.

    Not in our library10.1038/nbt.1511

  39. 39.

    Cox J, et al. Andromeda: a peptide search engine integrated into the MaxQuant environment. J Proteome Res. 2011;10:1794-1805.

    Not in our library10.1021/pr101065j

  40. 40.

    Tyanova S, Temu T, Cox J. The MaxQuant computational platform for mass spectrometry-based shotgun proteomics. Nat Protoc. 2016;11:2301.

    Not in our library10.1038/nprot.2016.136

All 53 references

Cited by papers we hold 2

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.