Skip to content

Science2 publishersReports disagree3 min readPublished

Two HHMI teams rebuild the family trees of millions of cells in developing mice

Teams led by HHMI's Jonathan Weissman and Jay Shendure reconstructed family trees spanning millions of cells in developing mice, reported in Science. Each lab had the cells record their own divisions in DNA, a first step toward mapping a mammal the way the roundworm was mapped.

The Scientist · Science desk

How we use AISend a correction

Illustration accompanying Two HHMI teams rebuild the family trees of millions of cells in developing mice
Generated illustration

What happened

  • Cell family trees had been built for simple, transparent animals such as roundworms, but a comprehensive fate map for a mammal had stayed out of reach.
  • Weissman's lab unveiled its PEtracer recorder in 2025; it uses prime editing to write heritable marks at more than 100 sites in the genome.
  • Shendure's lab built DNA Typewriter in 2022, a recorder that uses prime editing to log each cell division on a string of DNA.
  • Because the marks are read by sequencing single cells, one experiment shows both what each cell became and which cells it descended from.

Compiled by The ScientistSomething wrong?How this is made

Why it matters

  • capability Labs can ask where and when a developing mouse embryo is most vulnerable to genetic or environmental stress, with lineage and cell identity taken from the same cells.
  • capability Tumor studies gain a way to reconstruct how a cancer started, spread and became resistant to therapy from marks its cells carry.
  • constraint Since the trees are inferred from marks read once at the end, any future claim of a complete mammalian lineage will have to show that its branches match real divisions.

A mouse goes from one fertilized egg to hundreds of millions of cells in a few weeks [4]. The new trees span millions of cells, and the phys.org account calls them the most complete lineage maps yet made for a mammal [1]. It does not say what share of each embryo was sequenced, or how often a reconstructed branch matches a division that actually happened.

The roundworm could be mapped because it can be watched [5]. Its embryo is transparent, so researchers saw every cell divide under a microscope. A mouse embryo grows inside its mother and cannot be watched in real time over long periods [5]. Both labs had the cells keep the record instead. Each division adds a small, permanent mark to the genome. The marks are inherited, so the record can be read long after the divisions occurred [6]. "The cell divides and each of the sisters gets a mark, and those are inherited by their daughters, and they get additional marks, and so on and so forth," Weissman said. "And so, by looking at the end at the marks in this DNA, we're able to reconstruct what this relationship is." [8]

Reading the marks at the end is what separates this from the worm work [5]. "Most biological measurements are based on either live imaging, which is limited by the fact that most animal tissues are not transparent, or genomics, which is destructive and only measures a single time point," Shendure said [13]. "Recording techniques like the ones in these studies enable measurements over time, including in settings that we can't directly visualize." [14] The worm's lineage was observed one division at a time. The mouse lineages are inferred from marks found in sequenced cells [9].

The two labs also started recording at different points. Weissman's group at the Whitehead Institute engineered stem cells to carry the marks and injected them into an embryo, and the marks ended up in nearly every cell the embryo produced [10]. Shendure's group at the University of Washington injected the parts of DNA Typewriter straight into a fertilized egg, and the marks built up as its descendants divided [12]. In my view that difference is an asset. Where the two methods cover the same tissues, one tree can be checked against the other. I'd want to see that comparison before calling either map complete.

Weissman describes the result in measured terms. "It's really proof of principle that we can do what was done with the roundworm in 1983, but for mammals like you and me," he said [3]. The animals here were mice [1]. I think proof of principle is the claim the evidence earns. The recorders work in a living mammal at the scale of millions of cells, and the phys.org account says the teams have worked out how to build a mammalian fate map, a goal that had been out of reach [2].

What to watch

  • Whether either recorder is scaled from millions of mapped cells toward the hundreds of millions a mouse embryo reaches within a few weeks.
  • Published tumor-lineage work in mice using PEtracer or DNA Typewriter, which would test the method outside normal development.
  • Labs outside the Weissman and Shendure groups reproducing mouse lineage trees with either tool.

Clarity's read

What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.

Reality

Evidence70
Adoption
Insufficient
Hype gap+20
Incentives
Insufficient
Confidence62
Why these scores

Claim ledger

Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.

  1. [1]

    HHMI investigators Jonathan Weissman and Jay Shendure and their teams separately reconstructed cellular family trees spanning millions of cells in developing mice, described as the most complete lineage maps yet made for a mammal, and traced how those cells commit to their fates.

  2. [2]

    Researchers have created cell family trees for simple, transparent animals like roundworms, but a comprehensive cell fate map for a mammal had remained out of reach; Weissman's and Shendure's teams have separately figured out how to do it.

  3. [3]

    "It's really proof of principle that we can do what was done with the roundworm in 1983, but for mammals like you and me,"

    ReportedSupportedSource: Jonathan Weissman, quoted by phys.org3 sources— create a free account to open themView cited source

Sources

2 independent publishers whose own reporting we read for this story.

  1. nature.com

    1 article · October 7, 2026

    How to build a mouse: Embryo development captured in stunning detail
  2. phys.org

    1 article · October 8, 2026

    Mapping how a single cell becomes an entire mouse

Share your take

Let Clarity write the post for you.

Signed-in readers get a short post drafted on this story in the register they choose — narrative, analytical, or a direct position — editable to the last word before it goes anywhere. The share buttons at the top of this story work without an account.

Topics and entities

Follow any of these and your For You feed starts watching them — no settings page required.

Topics

Entities

Loading related stories