201
|
Benchmarking single-cell RNA-sequencing protocols for cell atlas projects. Nat Biotechnol 2020; 38:747-755. [PMID: 32518403 DOI: 10.1038/s41587-020-0469-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 287] [Impact Index Per Article: 57.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2019] [Revised: 02/18/2020] [Accepted: 02/26/2020] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) is the leading technique for characterizing the transcriptomes of individual cells in a sample. The latest protocols are scalable to thousands of cells and are being used to compile cell atlases of tissues, organs and organisms. However, the protocols differ substantially with respect to their RNA capture efficiency, bias, scale and costs, and their relative advantages for different applications are unclear. In the present study, we generated benchmark datasets to systematically evaluate protocols in terms of their power to comprehensively describe cell types and states. We performed a multicenter study comparing 13 commonly used scRNA-seq and single-nucleus RNA-seq protocols applied to a heterogeneous reference sample resource. Comparative analysis revealed marked differences in protocol performance. The protocols differed in library complexity and their ability to detect cell-type markers, impacting their predictive value and suitability for integration into reference cell atlases. These results provide guidance both for individual researchers and for consortium projects such as the Human Cell Atlas.
Collapse
|
202
|
Holland CH, Tanevski J, Perales-Patón J, Gleixner J, Kumar MP, Mereu E, Joughin BA, Stegle O, Lauffenburger DA, Heyn H, Szalai B, Saez-Rodriguez J. Robustness and applicability of transcription factor and pathway analysis tools on single-cell RNA-seq data. Genome Biol 2020; 21:36. [PMID: 32051003 PMCID: PMC7017576 DOI: 10.1186/s13059-020-1949-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 202] [Impact Index Per Article: 40.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2019] [Accepted: 01/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many functional analysis tools have been developed to extract functional and mechanistic insight from bulk transcriptome data. With the advent of single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq), it is in principle possible to do such an analysis for single cells. However, scRNA-seq data has characteristics such as drop-out events and low library sizes. It is thus not clear if functional TF and pathway analysis tools established for bulk sequencing can be applied to scRNA-seq in a meaningful way. RESULTS To address this question, we perform benchmark studies on simulated and real scRNA-seq data. We include the bulk-RNA tools PROGENy, GO enrichment, and DoRothEA that estimate pathway and transcription factor (TF) activities, respectively, and compare them against the tools SCENIC/AUCell and metaVIPER, designed for scRNA-seq. For the in silico study, we simulate single cells from TF/pathway perturbation bulk RNA-seq experiments. We complement the simulated data with real scRNA-seq data upon CRISPR-mediated knock-out. Our benchmarks on simulated and real data reveal comparable performance to the original bulk data. Additionally, we show that the TF and pathway activities preserve cell type-specific variability by analyzing a mixture sample sequenced with 13 scRNA-seq protocols. We also provide the benchmark data for further use by the community. CONCLUSIONS Our analyses suggest that bulk-based functional analysis tools that use manually curated footprint gene sets can be applied to scRNA-seq data, partially outperforming dedicated single-cell tools. Furthermore, we find that the performance of functional analysis tools is more sensitive to the gene sets than to the statistic used.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christian H Holland
- Institute for Computational Biomedicine, Bioquant, Heidelberg University, Faculty of Medicine, and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Joint Research Centre for Computational Biomedicine (JRC-COMBINE), RWTH Aachen University, Faculty of Medicine, Aachen, Germany
| | - Jovan Tanevski
- Institute for Computational Biomedicine, Bioquant, Heidelberg University, Faculty of Medicine, and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
- Department of Knowledge Technologies, Jožef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Javier Perales-Patón
- Institute for Computational Biomedicine, Bioquant, Heidelberg University, Faculty of Medicine, and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jan Gleixner
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), Genome Biology Unit, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Manu P Kumar
- Department of Biological Engineering, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Elisabetta Mereu
- CNAG-CRG, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology (BIST), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Brian A Joughin
- Department of Biological Engineering, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA
- Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Biology, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - Oliver Stegle
- German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
- European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), Genome Biology Unit, Heidelberg, Germany
- European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Holger Heyn
- CNAG-CRG, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology (BIST), Barcelona, Spain
- Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Bence Szalai
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Physiology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Julio Saez-Rodriguez
- Institute for Computational Biomedicine, Bioquant, Heidelberg University, Faculty of Medicine, and Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
- Joint Research Centre for Computational Biomedicine (JRC-COMBINE), RWTH Aachen University, Faculty of Medicine, Aachen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|