This multi-center SMaHT Network study applied primary template-directed amplification (PTA) single-cell whole-genome sequencing to 102 nuclei from frozen postmortem lung and colon of a single 74-year-old male donor; 87 cells passed secondary QC for small-variant calling and 98 were retained for copy-number analysis after removing 4 outliers . The strongest methodological feature is deliberate orthogonal validation: per-cell mutation burdens and spectra were compared against six duplex sequencing technologies applied to the same tissues, with single-cell median SNV rates within 8–16% of duplex medians and spectral cosine similarities of 0.97 (lung) and 0.91 (colon) — notably smaller than the 130–190% spread among the duplex technologies themselves, an honest and convincing internal control .
Reported observations: (i) ~68,083 lung and 37,563 colon small-mutation calls with sensitivity estimated at 37% (SNV) and 25% (indel) and expected false positives of only 2–4%; (ii) ≥6 spectral clusters and de novo signatures mapping to smoking (SBS4/ID3/CC>AA-like), APOBEC (SBS2-like), and clock-like components; (iii) a 197-SNV/2-indel shared-mutation set reconstructing a three-clade phylogeny rooted at the zygote, whose topology matched a bulk-based reconstruction (gRF=0.22) except one early event missed by bulk ; (iv) 14 whole-chromosome aneuploidies (6 Y losses, 2 Y gains) plus ≥10 Mb CNAs in 31 cells, and V(D)J recombination at TCR loci identifying 5 likely T lymphocytes among lung nuclei .
The authors are unusually transparent about PTA artifacts (dropout-suspected cells excluded, four cells with implausible widespread deletions quarantined, BAF-based reasoning for why large CNAs are likely genuine). However, the sample is one donor, one age, one sex, two tissues — no replication across individuals is possible within this dataset, and the companion SMaHT integrated map (25 donors) shows substantial inter-donor variability in somatic mosaicism, with single-tissue sampling detecting only a median 57.5% of early developmental sSNVs , reinforcing that single-donor claims about "comprehensive" mosaicism are illustrative, not population-level. Sensitivity of only 37%/25% for SNVs/indels means per-cell burdens are underestimates, though rates were sensitivity-corrected before duplex comparison. The claim that the root is the zygote rests on the three clades summing to ~100% VAF-inferred cell fractions — plausible but an inference, not a direct observation. APOBEC "didyma" interpretation leans on a single preprint , and no functional validation exists for the reconstructed dicentric rearrangement model. What would change the conclusions: multi-donor replication showing PTA-derived phylogenies and CNA spectra fail to reproduce, or systematic artifact demonstration at the megabase scale.
Know what changed, what holds up, and what remains uncertain. Every Friday. No ads.