Skip to main content
. 2024 Mar 5;56(3):515–526. doi: 10.1038/s12276-024-01186-2

Table 2.

Methylome sequencing methods with brief explanations and differences in workflows.

Method Protocol Base Sorting Average CpG Coverage Comments Refs
scRRBS RRBS Mechanical separation 1.02 × 106 (40% of total 2.5 × 106) Integrated all steps in single-tube reaction without including any purification steps prior to the bisulfite treatment step 22
scBS Bisulfite treatment Flow cytometry 3.7 × 106 First method to use postbisulfite adapter tagging 26
scWGBS Bisulfite treatment FACS ~ 106 Used postbisulfite adapter tagging 28
MID-RRBS RRBS FACS 3.5 ~ 23.1 × 104 Conducted RRBS method on a microfluidic device 36
sn-mC-seq Bisulfite treatment FANS 22.2 ± 5.79% (Genome wide coverage) Single nuclei-based method/used random priming 30
sn-mC-seq2 Bisulfite treatment FANS ~30.8 ± 7.5% (Genome wide coverage) Used RP-H (H = A, T, C) random primers for destabilizing primer hybridization, incorporated dephosphorylation step to inactivate dNTP 31
sci-MET Bisulfite treatment FANS 0.05 ~ 7% (human) Used combinatorial indexing 33
sci-METv2 Bisulfite treatment FANS ~2.2 × 106(LA) ~0.3 × 106(SL) (human) Two improved versions of sci-MET: sciMETv2.LA (linear amplification, accuracy), sciMETv2.SL (splint ligation, speed) 34
scSPLAT Bisulfite treatment FACS At most 20 ~ 40% of human cell Used RP-H for second strand synthesis and used splinted dsDNA adapters before PCR step 32
Msc-RRBS RRBS FACS (By cell cycle) ~0.9 × 106 (Human) Inline barcode single-well enzymatic reaction 29
sci-EM Enzymatic conversion FANS Not specified Combined combinatorial indexing with enzymatic conversion 35