Over the past two decades, cell biologists and computational biologists have worked to develop lineage tracing techniques that can decode the relationships between progenitor cells and their differentiated progeny. Despite steady progress, the field has long been constrained by the limited specificity and scalability of experimental labeling methods, as well as the insufficient accuracy and temporal resolution of computational analysis approaches. Transferring established lineage tracing strategies to complex biological systems and disease models remains difficult due to cell population heterogeneity, noise in high-dimensional omics data, and challenges in multi-omics integration. A comprehensive cell lineage tracing system—one that integrates high-performance experimental techniques with robust computational methods—is therefore needed to achieve high-precision labeling, high-dimensional data acquisition, and accurate reconstruction of lineage relationships.

A team led by researchers from Hunan University systematically surveys both experimental and computational approaches to cell lineage tracing. On the experimental side, the review covers non-CRISPR-based methods and CRISPR–Cas9-based strategies; on the computational side, it examines non-velocity low-dimensional embedding methods and RNA-velocity-based approaches. For each category, the authors detail the technical principles, application scenarios, advantages, and inherent limitations. They also discuss the translational value of lineage tracing in developmental biology, regenerative medicine, and oncology, and outline core challenges and future directions—including the potential integration of artificial intelligence.
Figure 1 outlines a typical workflow for computational cell lineage tracing. The process begins with specific labeling of target cells using experimental techniques such as CRISPR–Cas9 genetic barcoding or fluorescent protein labeling, ensuring that markers are heritable and traceable throughout development or disease progression. Next, single-cell RNA sequencing or spatial transcriptomics is used to collect high-dimensional molecular profiles, capturing both gene expression and spatial localization of individual cells. Finally, trajectory inference tools—notably RNA velocity—are applied to analyze dynamic states and developmental trajectories, while lineage reconstruction algorithms build cell lineage trees, predict cell fates, and visualize cellular dynamics during development, regeneration, or tumorigenesis. The framework provides a roadmap for high-precision, large-scale investigation of lineage relationships and cell fate decisions, and may ultimately support translational applications in regenerative medicine and personalized cancer therapy.
Source – Eurekalert
Over the past two decades, cell biologists and computational biologists have worked to develop lineage tracing techniques that can decode the relationships between progenitor cells and their differentiated progeny. Despite steady progress, the field has long been constrained by the limited specificity and scalability of experimental labeling methods, as well as the insufficient accuracy and temporal resolution of computational analysis approaches. Transferring established lineage tracing strategies to complex biological systems and disease models remains difficult due to cell population heterogeneity, noise in high-dimensional omics data, and challenges in multi-omics integration. A comprehensive cell lineage tracing system—one that integrates high-performance experimental techniques with robust computational methods—is therefore needed to achieve high-precision labeling, high-dimensional data acquisition, and accurate reconstruction of lineage relationships.
A team led by researchers from Hunan University systematically surveys both experimental and computational approaches to cell lineage tracing. On the experimental side, the review covers non-CRISPR-based methods and CRISPR–Cas9-based strategies; on the computational side, it examines non-velocity low-dimensional embedding methods and RNA-velocity-based approaches. For each category, the authors detail the technical principles, application scenarios, advantages, and inherent limitations. They also discuss the translational value of lineage tracing in developmental biology, regenerative medicine, and oncology, and outline core challenges and future directions—including the potential integration of artificial intelligence.
Figure 1 outlines a typical workflow for computational cell lineage tracing. The process begins with specific labeling of target cells using experimental techniques such as CRISPR–Cas9 genetic barcoding or fluorescent protein labeling, ensuring that markers are heritable and traceable throughout development or disease progression. Next, single-cell RNA sequencing or spatial transcriptomics is used to collect high-dimensional molecular profiles, capturing both gene expression and spatial localization of individual cells. Finally, trajectory inference tools—notably RNA velocity—are applied to analyze dynamic states and developmental trajectories, while lineage reconstruction algorithms build cell lineage trees, predict cell fates, and visualize cellular dynamics during development, regeneration, or tumorigenesis. The framework provides a roadmap for high-precision, large-scale investigation of lineage relationships and cell fate decisions, and may ultimately support translational applications in regenerative medicine and personalized cancer therapy.
Source – Eurekalert
Mao S, Zhang C, Chen R, Tang S, Fan X, Hu J. (2025) Cell lineage tracing: Methods, applications, and challenges. Quantitative Biology 13(4): e70006. [article]
Related Posts
RNAmel simplifies RNA sequencing data analysis with a reproducible, integrated platform
Heart failure reshapes bone marrow to create inflammation-related immune memory
Overlooked DNA regions surrounding ‘microexons’ hold missing pieces of autism’s genetic puzzle
RiboBA improves detection of hidden protein-coding regions using ribosome profiling
An anti-senescence gene may fight spinal disc deterioration
Scientists identify the neuroblastoma cells that signal poor outcomes
Novel biosensor uses DNA ‘barcodes’ to uncover disease signals in cells
CellART extracts single-cell information from high-resolution spatial transcriptomics
Cell2space restores spatial context to single-cell RNA sequencing data
Urine test may improve bladder cancer diagnosis and guide treatment decisions
DeCoRE – a computational method to resolve RNA structural heterogeneity from RNA structure probing data by direct RNA sequencing
Tracing 700 million years of cell evolution
How should biological replicates be handled in long-read RNA sequencing?
RNA-Seq reveals a new way the developing heart controls its growth
The Human RNome Project Consortium seeks to publish first-ever complete sequence of the body’s RNA
scFlowReport brings multiple single-cell RNA sequencing analyses into one workflow
Long-read RNA sequencing reveals how neurons choose alternative RNA endings
DeOPUS improves cell-type estimates from bulk RNA sequencing
ResolVI improves accuracy in spatial transcriptomics analysis
RNA sequencing reveals transcriptional allele differences in prostate cancer stem cells
Over the past two decades, cell biologists and computational biologists have worked to develop lineage tracing techniques that can decode the relationships between progenitor cells and their differentiated progeny. Despite steady progress, the field has long been constrained by the limited specificity and scalability of experimental labeling methods, as well as the insufficient accuracy and temporal resolution of computational analysis approaches. Transferring established lineage tracing strategies to complex biological systems and disease models remains difficult due to cell population heterogeneity, noise in high-dimensional omics data, and challenges in multi-omics integration. A comprehensive cell lineage tracing system—one that integrates high-performance experimental techniques with robust computational methods—is therefore needed to achieve high-precision labeling, high-dimensional data acquisition, and accurate reconstruction of lineage relationships.
A team led by researchers from Hunan University systematically surveys both experimental and computational approaches to cell lineage tracing. On the experimental side, the review covers non-CRISPR-based methods and CRISPR–Cas9-based strategies; on the computational side, it examines non-velocity low-dimensional embedding methods and RNA-velocity-based approaches. For each category, the authors detail the technical principles, application scenarios, advantages, and inherent limitations. They also discuss the translational value of lineage tracing in developmental biology, regenerative medicine, and oncology, and outline core challenges and future directions—including the potential integration of artificial intelligence.
Figure 1 outlines a typical workflow for computational cell lineage tracing. The process begins with specific labeling of target cells using experimental techniques such as CRISPR–Cas9 genetic barcoding or fluorescent protein labeling, ensuring that markers are heritable and traceable throughout development or disease progression. Next, single-cell RNA sequencing or spatial transcriptomics is used to collect high-dimensional molecular profiles, capturing both gene expression and spatial localization of individual cells. Finally, trajectory inference tools—notably RNA velocity—are applied to analyze dynamic states and developmental trajectories, while lineage reconstruction algorithms build cell lineage trees, predict cell fates, and visualize cellular dynamics during development, regeneration, or tumorigenesis. The framework provides a roadmap for high-precision, large-scale investigation of lineage relationships and cell fate decisions, and may ultimately support translational applications in regenerative medicine and personalized cancer therapy.
Source – Eurekalert
Mao S, Zhang C, Chen R, Tang S, Fan X, Hu J. (2025) Cell lineage tracing: Methods, applications, and challenges. Quantitative Biology 13(4): e70006. [article]
Related Posts
RNAmel simplifies RNA sequencing data analysis with a reproducible, integrated platform
Heart failure reshapes bone marrow to create inflammation-related immune memory
Overlooked DNA regions surrounding ‘microexons’ hold missing pieces of autism’s genetic puzzle
RiboBA improves detection of hidden protein-coding regions using ribosome profiling
An anti-senescence gene may fight spinal disc deterioration
Scientists identify the neuroblastoma cells that signal poor outcomes
Novel biosensor uses DNA ‘barcodes’ to uncover disease signals in cells
CellART extracts single-cell information from high-resolution spatial transcriptomics
Cell2space restores spatial context to single-cell RNA sequencing data
Urine test may improve bladder cancer diagnosis and guide treatment decisions
DeCoRE – a computational method to resolve RNA structural heterogeneity from RNA structure probing data by direct RNA sequencing
Tracing 700 million years of cell evolution
How should biological replicates be handled in long-read RNA sequencing?
RNA-Seq reveals a new way the developing heart controls its growth
The Human RNome Project Consortium seeks to publish first-ever complete sequence of the body’s RNA
scFlowReport brings multiple single-cell RNA sequencing analyses into one workflow
Long-read RNA sequencing reveals how neurons choose alternative RNA endings
DeOPUS improves cell-type estimates from bulk RNA sequencing
ResolVI improves accuracy in spatial transcriptomics analysis
RNA sequencing reveals transcriptional allele differences in prostate cancer stem cells
Stay Connected
Submit a Post to the Blog
Recent Posts
Subscribe to the RNA-Seq Blog
RNA-Seq Products & Services