The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet; none of the 30 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Comparative Analysis of Single-Cell RNA Sequencing Methods
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) offers new possibilities to address biological and medical questions. However, systematic comparisons of the performance of diverse scRNA-seq protocols are lacking. We generated data from 583 mouse embryonic stem cells to evaluate six prominent scRNA-seq methods: CEL-seq2, Drop-seq, MARS-seq, SCRB-seq, Smart-seq, and Smart-seq2. While Smart-seq2 detected the most genes per cell and across cells, CEL-seq2, Drop-seq, MARS-seq, and SCRB-seq quantified mRNA levels with less amplification noise due to the use of unique molecular identifiers (UMIs). Power simulations at different sequencing depths showed that Drop-seq is more cost-efficient for transcriptome quantification of large numbers of cells, while MARS-seq, SCRB-seq, and Smart-seq2 are more efficient when analyzing fewer cells. Our quantitative comparison offers the basis for an informed choice among six prominent scRNA-seq methods, and it provides a framework for benchmarking further improvements of scRNA-seq protocols.
Checked 2026-10-11 · 1 reference not checked yet
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
37 Own result · 17 Not checked yet · 11 Own method · 10 Own interpretation · 4 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That amplification noise can be a major factor is seen by the strong increase of extra Poisson variability when ignoring UMIs and considering read counts only (Figure 5B, left; Figure S7A).”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A 50% detection probability was reached at 7, 11, 14, 16, 17, and 28 ERCC molecules for Smart-seq2, Smart-seq/C1, CEL-seq2/C1, SCRB-seq, Drop-seq, and MARS-seq, respectively (Figure S4C).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, among the UMI methods, CEL-seq2/C1 and SCRB-seq libraries had the highest complexity of mRNA molecules”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As expected, the 3 0 counting methods showed a strong bias of reads mapped to the 3 0 end (Figure S3D).”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“cell (Figure 3C). Smart-seq2 detectedthe highestnumberofgenes per cell with a median of 9,138.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While Smartseq2 was the most sensitive method in both cases”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This was possible for 96.5% (MARS-seq) to 98.9% (Smart-seq2) of all the 13,361 genes.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, between 48% (Smart-seq2) and 30% (Smart-seq/C1) of all reads were exonic and, thus, were used to quantify gene expression levels.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In particular, the deep sequencing of Smart-seq2 libraries showed clearly that the number of detected genes did not change when increasing the sequencing depth from one million to five million reads per cell (Figure S2B).”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As expected, accuracy was worse for narrower and especially for lower concentration ranges (Figure S5C).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 32
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
- Probably not a substantial claim. 12
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Taking the number of detected genes per cell as a measure of sensitivity, we found that Drop-seq and MARS-seq had the lowest sensitivity, with a median of 4,811 and 4,763 genes detected per cell, respectively”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A general difference in expression values between 3 0 counting and full-length methods also was reflected in their strong separation by the first principal component, explaining 37% of the total variance”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“while CEL-seq2/C1, SCRB-seq, and Smartseq/C1 detected a median of 7,536, 7,906, and 7,572 genes per”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While the majority of genes ( 13,000) were detected by all methods, 400 genes were specific to each of the 3 0 counting methods, and 1,000 genes were specific to each of the two full-length methods (Figure S3A).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Drop-seq performed better and SCRB-seq and MARS-seq performed worse when using ERCCs.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To compare the total number of genes detected across many cells, we pooled the sequence data of 65 cells per method, and we detected 19,000 genes for CEL-Seq2/C1, 17,000 for MARS-seq, 18,000 for Drop-seq and SCRB-Seq, 20,000 for Smart-seq/C1, and 21,000 for Smart-seq2 (Figure 3D).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As expected from the number of detected genes per cell (Figure 3C), MARS-seq had the highest median dropout probability (74%) and Smart-seq2 had the lowest (26%) (Figure 5A).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When we stratified our analysis (considering UMIs) across five bins of expression levels, the ranking of methods was recapitulated and showed that the lowest expression bin strongly limited the TPR in all methods (Figure S9B).”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Using minimal cost calculations, we find that Drop-seq is the most cost-effective method, closely followed by SCRB-seq, MARS-seq, and Smart-seq2.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While Smart-seq2 and CEL-seq2/C1 needed just 1.3-fold more cells at 0.25 million reads than at one million reads to reach 80% power, SCRB-seq and Drop-seq required 2.6-fold morecells (Table 1).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, we find that Drop-seq, SCRB-seq, and MARS-seq are the most cost-effective methods, closely followed by Smart-seq2, if using an in-house-produced transposase.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, SCRB-seq is the most powerful method at one million reads and half a million reads, but CELseq2/C1 is the most powerful method at a sequencing depth of 250,000 reads.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Calculating minimal costs this way, Drop-seq (690$) is the most cost-effective method when sequencing 254 cells at a depth of 250,000 reads, and SCRB-seq (810$), MARS-seq (820$), and Smart-seq2 (1,090$) are slightly more expensive at the same performance (Table 1).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Sequencing costs are the same for all methods.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The p value of that difference was lowest for SCRB-seq, the most powerful method, and highest for Smartseq/C1, the least powerful method (Figure S10D).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, the decrease in power was moderate (Figure 6C; Table 1) and followed the drop in sensitivity at different sequencing depths (Figure 3B).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CEL-seq2/C1, Drop-seq, MARS-seq, and Smart-seq2 performed slightly worse, reaching 80% power with 86, 99, 110, and 95 cells per group, respectively, while Smart-seq/C1 needed 150 cells to reach 80% power (Figure 6A).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our comparison, we clearly find that Smart-seq2 is the most sensitive method, closely followed by SCRB-seq, Smart-seq/C1, and CEL-seq2/C1, while Drop-seq and MARSseq detect nearly 50% fewer genes per cell (Figures 3B and 3C).”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TPRs differed considerably among methods and SCRB-seq performed best, reaching a median TPR of 80% with 64 cells.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our simulations show that, at a sequencing depth of one million reads, SCRB-seq has the highest power, probably due to a good balance of high sensitivity and low amplification noise.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“We used mESCs cultured under two inhibitor/leukemia inhibitory factor (2i/LIF) conditions to obtain a relatively homogeneous cell population (Gr € un et al., 2014; Kolodziejczyk et al., 2015b), so that biological variation was similar among experiments and, hence, we mainly compared technical variation.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gr € un et al., 2014
- Not checked yetcites Kolodziejczyk et al., 2015b
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This extra Poisson variability includes biological variation (assumed to be the same across methods in our data) and technical variation, and the latter includes noise introduced by amplification (Brennecke et al., 2013; Gr € un et al., 2014; Stegle et al., 2015).”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Indeed, a mixture model including a dropout probability and a negative binomial distribution, modeling the overdispersion in the count data, have been shown to represent scRNA-seq data better than the negative binomial alone (Finak et al., 2015; Kharchenko et al., 2014).”
What the sources say
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, it seems that full-length methods turn a slightly higher fraction of transcripts into sequenceable molecules than 3 0 counting methods and are more sensitive in this respect.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among the 3 0 counting methods, CEL-seq2/C1 and SCRB-seq detect about as many genes per cell as Smart-seq/C1, whereas Drop-seq and MARS-seq detect considerably fewer genes.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This suggests that they are unlikely to remain method specific at higher expression levels and that their impact on conclusions drawn from scRNAseq data is rather limited (Lun et al., 2016).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lun et al., 2016 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the Smart-seq protocol has been optimized for sensitivity, more even full-length coverage, accuracy, and cost (Picelli et al., 2013)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Picelli et al., 2013 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, we find that Smart-seq2 is the most sensitive method, as it detects the highest number of genes per cell and the most genes in total across cells and has the most even coverage across transcripts.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Utilization of UMI information improves quantification of mRNA molecules (Gr € un et al., 2014; Islam et al., 2014)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gr € un et al., 2014
- Not checked yetcites Islam et al., 2014 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Smart-seq/C1 is slightly less sensitive per cell and detects almost the same number of genes across cells with slightly less even coverage.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Other protocols have sacrificed full-length coverage in order to sequence part of the primer used for cDNA generation. This enables early barcoding of libraries (i.e., the incorporation of cell-specific barcodes), allowing for multiplexing the cDNA amplification and thereby increasing the throughput of scRNAseq library generation by one to three orders of magnitude (Hashimshony et al., 2012; Jaiti”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“and this improved Smart-seq2 protocol (Picelli et al., 2014b) has also become widely used (Gokce et al., 2016; Reinius et al., 2016; Tirosh et al., 2016).”
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, it has previously been shown that scRNA-seq conducted in the small volumes available in the automated microfluidic platform from Fluidigm (C1 platform) outperforms CEL-seq2, Smart-seq, or other commercially available kits in microliter volumes (Hashimshony et al., 2016; Wu et al., 2014).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hashimshony et al., 2016 source
- Not checked yetcites Wu et al., 2014
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To this end, we generated data for all six compared methods from the same cells, cultured under the same condition in the same laboratory.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, our power simulation framework considers the full range of dropout rates and is not biased against more sensitive methods.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“successful establishment of the method in our lab was confirmed by a species-mixing experiment (Figure S1A).”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These estimates were very similar among our technical replicates, and, hence, our method comparison is valid with respect to batch variations (Figures S10B-S10D).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“J1 embryonic stem cells were obtained from E. Li and T. Chen and mycoplasma free determined by a PCR-based test.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the presence of batch effects shows that experiments need to be designed in a way that does not confound batches with biological factors (Hicks et al., 2015).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hicks et al., 2015
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, we systematically compared six prominent scRNA-seq methods and found that Drop-seq is preferable when quantifying transcriptomes of large numbers of cells with low sequencing depth, SCRB-seq and MARS-seq is preferable when quantifying transcriptomes of fewer cells, and Smart-seq2 is preferable when annotating and/or quantifying transcriptomes of fewer cells as long one can use in-house”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cell line authentication was not recently performed.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The quote only partly states this claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We trimmed cDNA reads to the same length and processed raw reads in the same way as data sequenced for this study.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similar sequencing qualities were confirmed by FastQC v0.10.1 (Figure S1B).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
A thorough and systematic comparison of relevant parameters across scRNA-seq methods is still lacking.
“However, a thorough and systematic comparison of relevant parameters across scRNA-seq methods is still lacking.”
“However, systematic comparisons of the performance of diverse scRNA-seq protocols are lacking.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Differences in total variation among methods are due to differences in their technical variation.
“Hence, we can assume that differences in the total variation among methods are due to differences in their technical variation.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The amount of biological variation is the same in cells analyzed by each of the six methods.
“As we used the same cell type under the same culture conditions for all methods, the amount of biological variation should be the same in the cells analyzed by each of the six methods.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Sequencing costs are the same for all methods.
“we assume that sequencing costs are the same for all methods.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Detections of ERCC molecules are independent from each other and can be regarded as independent Bernoulli trials.
“Detections are independent from each other and are thus regarded as independent Bernoulli trials.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Specifically, we found the optimal read depths to be ~10,000 in most evaluations, which is relatively low compared to previous recommendations34–36,80,81.”
From scPower accelerates and optimizes the design of multi-sample single cell transcriptomic studies (2021) · cites this paper as [36]
In the citing paper
“Combinatorial indexing and droplet-based methods have higher throughput and lower cost per cell, whereas plate-based methods provide more sensitive gene detection and are more customizable (Ziegenhain et al., 2017).”
From Single-Cell Sequencing of Brain Cell Transcriptomes and Epigenomes (2021) · cites this paper as Ziegenhain et al., 2017
In the citing paper
“In scRNA-seq experiments, individual cells are typically not sequenced to saturation, leading to sparse count matrices, where only highly expressed genes are detected with counts greater than zero.”
From scPower accelerates and optimizes the design of multi-sample single cell transcriptomic studies (2021) · cites this paper as [36]
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, scRNA‐seq techniques can be divided into full‐length and 3′ enrichment methods (Svensson et al, 2017; Ziegenhain et al, 2017).”
From Current best practices in single-cell RNA-seq analysis: a tutorial (2019) · cites this paper as Ziegenhain et al, 2017
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
§ Cost Efficiency Is Similarly High for Drop-Seq, MARS-Seq, SCRB-Seq, and Smart-Seq2
“| Smart-seq2 (commercial) | 0.8 | 5.2 | 95/105/128 | 30 | 10,470/11,040/13,160 |”
§ Cost Efficiency Is Similarly High for Drop-Seq, MARS-Seq, SCRB-Seq, and Smart-Seq2
“c Assuming $5 per one million reads.”
Citations
Cites
STAR: ultrafast universal RNA-seq aligner
Dobin, A., Davis, C. A., Schlesinger, F., Drenkow, J., Zaleski, C., Jha, S., Batut, P., Chaisson, M., & Gingeras, T. R. (2013) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bts635 · Cited by 51,709
limma powers differential expression analyses for RNA-sequencing and microarray studies
Ritchie, M. E., Phipson, B., Wu, D., Hu, Y., Law, C. W., Shi, W., & Smyth, G. K. (2015) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkv007 · Cited by 40,458
Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads
Martin, M. (2011) · EMBnet.journal · doi:10.14806/ej.17.1.200 · Cited by 33,889
An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome
The ENCODE Project Consortium (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11247 · Cited by 18,072
Highly parallel genome-wide expression profiling of individual cells using nanoliter droplets.
Macosko, E. Z., Basu, A., Satija, R., Nemesh, J., Shekhar, K., Goldman, M., Tirosh, I., Bialas, A. R., Kamitaki, N., Martersteck, E. M., et al. (2015) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.002 · Cited by 7,110
voom: precision weights unlock linear model analysis tools for RNA-seq read counts
Law, C. W., Chen, Y., Shi, W., & Smyth, G. K. (2014) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2014-15-2-r29 · Cited by 6,155
Dissecting the multicellular ecosystem of metastatic melanoma by single-cell RNA-seq
Tirosh, I., Izar, B., Prakadan, S. M., Wadsworth, M. H., Treacy, D., Trombetta, J. J., Rotem, A., Rodman, C., Lian, C., Murphy, G., et al. (2016) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aad0501 · Cited by 4,944
Full-length RNA-seq from single cells using Smart-seq2
Picelli, S., Faridani, O. R., Björklund, Å. K., Winberg, G., Sagasser, S., & Sandberg, R. (2014) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/nprot.2014.006 · Cited by 4,137
Targeted mutation of the DNA methyltransferase gene results in embryonic lethality
Li, E., Bestor, T. H., & Jaenisch, R. (1992) · Cell · doi:10.1016/0092-8674(92)90611-f · Cited by 3,984
Droplet barcoding for single-cell transcriptomics applied to embryonic stem cells
Klein, A. M., Mazutis, L., Akartuna, I., Tallapragada, N., Veres, A., Li, V., Peshkin, L., Weitz, D. A., & Kirschner, M. W. (2015) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.04.044 · Cited by 3,356
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Hicks, 2015, On the widespread and critical impact of systematic bias and batch effects in single-cell RNA-Seq data, bioRxiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 501–600 of 1,003
Applying Single-Cell Analysis to Gonadogenesis and DSDs (Disorders/Differences of Sex Development)
Estermann, M. A., & Smith, C. A. (2020) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms21186614 · Cited by 24
Network Modeling in Biology: Statistical Methods for Gene and Brain Networks
Wang, Y. X. R., Li, L., Li, J. J., & Huang, H. (2020) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/20-sts792 · Cited by 28
Single-cell RNA sequencing reveals developmental heterogeneity among Plasmodium berghei sporozoites
Ruberto, A. A., Bourke, C., Mérienne, N., Obadia, T., Amino, R., & Müeller, I. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-82914-w · Cited by 24
Hu, Y., Li, B., Zhang, W., Liu, N., Cai, P., Chen, F., & Qu, K. (2021) · Briefings in Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bib/bbab085 · Cited by 25
Kanazawa, S., Okada, H., Hojo, H., Ohba, S., Iwata, J., Komura, M., Hikita, A., & Hoshi, K. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-94186-5 · Cited by 23
COTAN: scRNA-seq data analysis based on gene co-expression
Galfrè, S. G., Morandin, F., Pietrosanto, M., Cremisi, F., & Helmer‐Citterich, M. (2021) · NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/nargab/lqab072 · Cited by 24
Methods and platforms for analysis of nucleic acids from single-cell based on microfluidics
Liu, L., Dong, X., Tu, Y., Miao, G., Zhang, Z., Zhang, L., Wei, Z., Yu, D., & Qiu, X. (2021) · Microfluidics and Nanofluidics · doi:10.1007/s10404-021-02485-0 · Cited by 23
Single-Cell RNA Sequencing (scRNA-seq) in Cardiac Tissue: Applications and Limitations
Wang, M., Gu, M., Liu, L., Liu, Y., & Tian, L. (2021) · Vascular Health and Risk Management · doi:10.2147/vhrm.s288090 · Cited by 25
Application and prospects of single cell sequencing in tumors
Huang, R. H., Wang, L. X., He, J., & Gao, W. (2021) · Biomarker Research · doi:10.1186/s40364-021-00336-2 · Cited by 25
Tian, G., Li, M., & Lv, G. (2022) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2021.778559 · Cited by 24
Shomroni, O., Sitte, M., Schmidt, J., Parbin, S., Ludewig, F., Yigit, G., Zelarayan, L. C., Streckfuß‐Bömeke, K., Wollnik, B., & Salinas, G. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-07874-1 · Cited by 24
Ulcerative Colitis: Novel Epithelial Insights Provided by Single Cell RNA Sequencing
Serigado, J. M., Foulke-Abel, J. D., Hines, W. C., Hanson, J. A., In, J., & Kovbasnjuk, O. N. (2022) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2022.868508 · Cited by 23
Comparative Analysis of Single-Cell RNA Sequencing Platforms and Methods
Ashton, J. M., Rehrauer, H., Myers, J. R., Myers, J., Zanche, M., Balys, M., Foox, J., Mason, C. E., Steen, R. G., Kuentzel, M. L., et al. (2021) · Journal of Biomolecular Techniques JBT · doi:10.7171/3fc1f5fe.3eccea01 · Cited by 24
Manivannan, S., Mansfield, C., Zhang, X., Kodigepalli, K. M., Majumdar, U., Garg, V., & Basu, M. (2022) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-022-03779-x · Cited by 25
Transcriptional Heterogeneity of Cellular Senescence in Cancer
Junaid, M., Lee, A., Kim, J., Park, T. J., & Lim, S. B. (2022) · Molecules and Cells · doi:10.14348/molcells.2022.0036 · Cited by 25
Oligodendrocyte lineage cells: Advances in development, disease, and heterogeneity
Wang, J., Gao, M.-Y., Gao, R., Zhao, K., Zhang, Y., & Li, X. (2022) · Journal of Neurochemistry · doi:10.1111/jnc.15728 · Cited by 24
Chen, K., Ma, Y., Liu, X., Zhong, X., Di, L., Tian, X., Zheng, L., & Yang, Y. (2023) · Cancer Letters · doi:10.1016/j.canlet.2023.216421 · Cited by 23
Carabidae Semiochemistry: Current and Future Directions
Rork, A. M., & Renner, T. (2018) · Journal of Chemical Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10886-018-1011-8 · Cited by 24
A diffusion-based microfluidic device for single-cell RNA-seq
Sarma, M., Lee, J., Ma, S., Li, S., & Lu, C. (2019) · Lab on a Chip · doi:10.1039/c8lc00967h · Cited by 23
Pourteimoor, V., Mohammadi‐Yeganeh, S., & Paryan, M. (2016) · Tumor Biology · doi:10.1007/s13277-016-5349-7 · Cited by 24
F-16 Class A mishaps in the U.S. Air Force, 1975-93.
Knapp, C.-L., & Johnson, W. R. (1996) · PubMed · Cited by 24
Advancements in technology for characterizing the tumor immune microenvironment
Yan, H., Ju, X., Huang, A., & Yuan, J. (2024) · International Journal of Biological Sciences · doi:10.7150/ijbs.92525 · Cited by 24
Miao, S., Chai, M.-Q., Liu, X.-Y., Wei, C., Zhang, C., Sun, N.-N., Fei, Q.-Z., Peng, L.-L., & Qiu, H. (2024) · BMC Cancer · doi:10.1186/s12885-024-12224-7 · Cited by 25
Nalla, L. V., Kanukolanu, A., Yeduvaka, M., & Gajula, S. N. R. (2024) · PROTEOMICS - CLINICAL APPLICATIONS · doi:10.1002/prca.202400101 · Cited by 23
Metabolic engineering approaches for the biosynthesis of antibiotics
Yook, G., Nam, J., Jo, Y.-M., Yoon, H. S., & Yang, D. (2025) · Microbial Cell Factories · doi:10.1186/s12934-024-02628-2 · Cited by 26
Islam, M., Chen, B., Spraggins, J. M., Kelly, R., & Lau, K. S. (2020) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2020.04.073 · Cited by 23
Pasetto, A., & Lu, Y. (2021) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2021.689091 · Cited by 24
Understanding the pathogenesis of infectious diseases by single-cell RNA sequencing
Huang, W., Wang, D., & Yao, Y. (2021) · Microbial Cell · doi:10.15698/mic2021.09.759 · Cited by 25
Immunotherapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: New Prospects for the Cancer Therapy
Fasano, R., Shadbad, M. A., Brunetti, O., Argentiero, A., Calabrese, A., Nardulli, P., Calbi, R., Baradaran, B., & Silvestris, N. (2021) · Life · doi:10.3390/life11121355 · Cited by 24
Zhang, Q., Xu, X., Lin, L., Yang, J., Xing, N., Chen, X., Wu, L., Song, J. T., & Yang, C. J. (2022) · Lab on a Chip · doi:10.1039/d2lc00167e · Cited by 23
CDK2 kinase activity is a regulator of male germ cell fate
Singh, P., Patel, R. K., Palmer, N., Grenier, J. K., Paduch, D. A., Kaldis, P., Grimson, A., & Schimenti, J. C. (2019) · Development · doi:10.1242/dev.180273 · Cited by 23
Illuminating Neural Circuits in Alzheimer’s Disease
Yang, Y., & Wang, J. (2021) · Neuroscience Bulletin · doi:10.1007/s12264-021-00716-6 · Cited by 24
Single-cell spatial transcriptomics in cardiovascular development, disease, and medicine
Han, S., Xu, Q., Du, Y., Tang, C., Cui, H., Xia, X., Zheng, R., Sun, Y., & Shang, H. (2023) · Genes & Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.gendis.2023.101163 · Cited by 24
An, Q., Duan, L., Wang, Y., Wang, F., Liu, X., Liu, C., & Hu, Q. (2025) · Journal of Translational Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12967-025-06167-1 · Cited by 28
Single-Cell mRNA Sequencing of the Mouse Brain Vasculature
Vanlandewijck, M., & Betsholtz, C. (2018) · Methods in molecular biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-8712-2_21 · Cited by 21
Single-cell transcriptomics: a novel precision medicine technique in nephrology
Kim, J., & Park, J. (2020) · The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine · doi:10.3904/kjim.2020.415 · Cited by 22
Ogata, N., Nishimura, A., Matsuda, T., Kubota, M., & Ōmasa, T. (2020) · Biotechnology and Bioengineering · doi:10.1002/bit.27624 · Cited by 23
Noise regularization removes correlation artifacts in single-cell RNA-seq data preprocessing
Zhang, R., Atwal, G. S., & Lim, W. K. (2021) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2021.100211 · Cited by 21
Single-Cell Sequencing and Its Applications in Liver Cancer
Tian, B., & Li, Q. (2022) · Frontiers in Oncology · doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.857037 · Cited by 23
Perspectives on the Use of Toxicogenomics to Assess Environmental Risk
Portugal, J., Mansilla, S., & Piña, B. (2022) · Frontiers in Bioscience-Landmark · doi:10.31083/j.fbl2710294 · Cited by 27
Applications of Single-Cell Sequencing for Multiomics
Xu, Y., & Zhou, X. (2018) · Methods in molecular biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-7717-8_19 · Cited by 22
de Biagi, C. A. O., Cury, S. S., Alves, C. P., Rabhi, N., Silva, W. A., Farmer, S. R., Carvalho, R. F., & Júnior, M. L. B. (2021) · Cells · doi:10.3390/cells10113073 · Cited by 25
Systems immunology allows a new view on human dendritic cells
Schultze, J. L., & Aschenbrenner, A. C. (2018) · Seminars in Cell and Developmental Biology · doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2018.02.017 · Cited by 25
Spatial organization of transcribed eukaryotic genesPreprint
Leidescher, S., Ribisel, J., Ullrich, S., Feodorova, Y. N., Hildebrand, E. M., Bultmann, S., Link, S., Thanisch, K., Mulholland, C. B., Dekker, J., et al. (2020) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2020.05.20.106591 · Cited by 22
Self-citationPrecision monitoring of immunotherapies in solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
DiLoreto, R., Khush, K. K., & Vlaminck, I. D. (2017) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2017.06.009 · Cited by 21
Yuan, Z. F., Shu, L., Fu, J., Yang, P., Wang, Y., Sun, J., Zheng, M., Liu, Z., Yang, J., Song, J., et al. (2024) · Arteriosclerosis Thrombosis and Vascular Biology · doi:10.1161/atvbaha.124.321129 · Cited by 22
Single Cell Gene Expression to Understand the Dynamic Architecture of the Heart
Massaia, A., Cháves, P., Samari, S., Miragaia, R. J., Meyer, K. B., Teichmann, S. A., & Noseda, M. (2018) · Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine · doi:10.3389/fcvm.2018.00167 · Cited by 20
In situ 10-cell RNA sequencing in tissue and tumor biopsy samples
Singh, S., Wang, L., Schaff, D. L., Sutcliffe, M. D., Koeppel, A. F., Kim, J., Önengüt-Gümüşcü, S., Park, K.-S., Zong, H., & Janes, K. A. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-41235-9 · Cited by 20
scHinter: imputing dropout events for single-cell RNA-seq data with limited sample size
Ye, W., Ye, W., Ye, C., Li, S., Ye, L., Ji, G., & Wu, X. (2019) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz627 · Cited by 21
Reticker-Flynn, N. E., & Engleman, E. G. (2020) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.53839 · Cited by 23
Lhamo, D., & Luan, S. (2021) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2021.689545 · Cited by 21
Single-cell RNA Sequencing Reveals Heterogeneity of Cultured Bovine Satellite Cells
Lyu, P., Qi, Y., Tu, Z. J., & Jiang, H. (2021) · Frontiers in Genetics · doi:10.3389/fgene.2021.742077 · Cited by 24
Li, W., Zhao, Y., Wang, Y., He, Z., Zhang, L., Yuan, B., Li, C., Luo, Z., Gao, B., & Yan, M. (2023) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2023.1090637 · Cited by 22
Interrogating epigenetic mechanisms with chemically customized chromatin
Hananya, N., Koren, S., & Muir, T. W. (2023) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41576-023-00664-z · Cited by 20
Novel insights into HBV‐hepatocellular carcinoma at single‐cell sequencing
Yin, D., Zhou, T., Xia, X., Chang, H., Liu, Z., Li, Q., Shu, Y., & Xu, H. (2023) · MedComm – Oncology · doi:10.1002/mog2.60 · Cited by 23
Digital PCR for Single-Cell Analysis
Fang, W., Liu, X., Maiga, M., Cao, W., Mu, Y., Yan, Q., & Zhu, Q. (2024) · Biosensors · doi:10.3390/bios14020064 · Cited by 22
Sex-specific developmental gene expression atlas unveils dimorphic gene networks in C. elegans
Haque, R., Peedikayil‐Kurien, S., Setty, H., Salzberg, Y., Stelzer, G., Litvak, E., Gingold, H., Rechavi, O., & Oren‐Suissa, M. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-48369-z · Cited by 20
Sun, Y., Kong, L., Huang, J., Deng, H., Bian, X., Li, X., Cui, F., Dou, L., Cao, C., Zou, Q., et al. (2024) · Briefings in Functional Genomics · doi:10.1093/bfgp/elae023 · Cited by 23
Sukys, A., & Grima, R. (2025) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkaf295 · Cited by 22
Delineating biological and technical variance in single cell expression data
Arzalluz-Luque, Á., Devailly, G., Mantsoki, A., & Joshi, A. (2017) · The International Journal of Biochemistry & Cell Biology · doi:10.1016/j.biocel.2017.07.006 · Cited by 21
New transcriptomic tools to understand testis development and functions
Lecluze, E., Jégou, B., Rolland, A. D., & Chalmel, F. (2018) · Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.mce.2018.02.019 · Cited by 23
CLEAR: coverage-based limiting-cell experiment analysis for RNA-seq
Walker, L. A., Sovic, M. G., Chiang, C., Hu, E. Y., Denninger, J. K., Chen, X., Kirby, E. D., Byrd, J. C., Muthusamy, N., Bundschuh, R. A., et al. (2020) · Journal of Translational Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12967-020-02247-6 · Cited by 20
Single-Cell Sequencing Technologies in Precision Oncology
Melnekoff, D. T., & Laganà, A. (2022) · Advances in experimental medicine and biology · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-91836-1_15 · Cited by 22
Identifying cell state–associated alternative splicing events and their coregulationPreprint
Najar, C. F. B. A., Burra, P., Yosef, N., & Lareau, L. F. (2022) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.276109.121 · Cited by 20
Comparative analysis of multiplexed in situ gene expression profiling technologiesPreprint
Hartman, A., & Satija, R. (2024) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.96949 · Cited by 24
Unlocking ovarian cancer heterogeneity: advancing immunotherapy through single-cell transcriptomics
Balan, D., Kampan, N. C., Plebanski, M., & Aziz, N. H. A. (2024) · Frontiers in Oncology · doi:10.3389/fonc.2024.1388663 · Cited by 21
Crosstalk among plant hormone regulates the root development
Ma, Y., Xu, J., Qi, J., Zhao, D., Jin, M., Wang, T., Yang, Y., Shi, H., Guo, L., & Zhang, H. (2024) · Plant Signaling & Behavior · doi:10.1080/15592324.2024.2404807 · Cited by 20
Lu, Y., Li, M., Gao, Z., Ma, H., Chong, Y., Hong, J., Wu, J., Wu, D., Xi, D., & Deng, W. (2024) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms252312940 · Cited by 20
Toward mapping the human body at a cellular resolution
Roy, A. L., & Conroy, R. (2018) · Molecular Biology of the Cell · doi:10.1091/mbc.e18-04-0260 · Cited by 20
Denninger, J. K., Walker, L. A., Chen, X. X., Turkoglu, A. M., Pan, A., Tapp, Z. M., Senthilvelan, S., Rindani, R., Kokiko‐Cochran, O. N., Bundschuh, R. A., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnmol.2022.810722 · Cited by 20
Jung, K. L., Choi, U. Y., Park, A., Foo, S., Kim, S., Lee, S.-A., & Jung, J. U. (2022) · PLoS Pathogens · doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1010775 · Cited by 20
Borsi, G., Motheramgari, K., Dhiman, H., Baumann, M., Sinkala, E., Sauerland, M. B., Riba, J., & Borth, N. (2023) · Journal of Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.jbiotec.2023.01.006 · Cited by 20
Single-cell RNA landscape of the special fiber initiation process in Bombax ceiba
Ding, Y., Gao, W., Qin, Y., Li, X., Zhang, Z., Lai, W., Yang, Y., Guo, K., Li, P., Zhou, S., et al. (2023) · Plant Communications · doi:10.1016/j.xplc.2023.100554 · Cited by 20
Li, Y., Nguyen, J., Anastasiu, D. C., & Arriaga, E. A. (2023) · Briefings in Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bib/bbad157 · Cited by 22
Kessler, S., Burke, B. E., Andrieux, G., Schinköthe, J., Hamberger, L., Kacza, J., Zhan, S., Reasoner, C., Dutt, T. S., Osman, M. K., et al. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-48934-6 · Cited by 22
Performance comparison of high throughput single-cell RNA-Seq platforms in complex tissues
Colino‐Sanguino, Y., de la Fuente, L. R., Gloss, B., Law, A. M. K., Handler, K., Pajic, M., Salomon, R., Gallego‐Ortega, D., & Valdés‐Mora, F. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e37185 · Cited by 22
Application of single-cell RNA sequencing in embryonic development
Shangguan, Y., Li, C., Lin, H., Ou, M., Tang, D., Dai, Y., & Yan, Q. (2020) · Genomics · doi:10.1016/j.ygeno.2020.08.007 · Cited by 21
Fulcher, J. M., Markillie, L. M., Mitchell, H. D., Williams, S., Engbrecht, K. M., Degnan, D. J., Bramer, L., Moore, R. J., Chrisler, W., Cantlon-Bruce, J., et al. (2022) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2022.05.17.492137 · Cited by 20
Guo, H., Zhang, L. X., Guo, H., Cui, X., Fan, Y., Li, T., Qi, X., Yan, T., Chen, A., Shi, F., et al. (2024) · PLANT PHYSIOLOGY · doi:10.1093/plphys/kiae107 · Cited by 19
Shi, R., Chen, H., Zhang, W., Leak, R. K., Lou, D., Chen, K., & Chen, J. (2024) · Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism · doi:10.1177/0271678x241305914 · Cited by 19
Navigating single-cell RNA-sequencing: protocols, tools, databases, and applications
Arya, A., Tripathi, P., Dubey, N., Aier, I., & Varadwaj, P. K. (2025) · Genomics & Informatics · doi:10.1186/s44342-025-00044-5 · Cited by 20
Cui, C., Cui, F., Zou, Q., Zhang, Z., & Jia, L. (2025) · Molecular Therapy — Nucleic Acids · doi:10.1016/j.omtn.2025.102583 · Cited by 23
Benčik, I., Martinović, L. S., Mladenić, T., Ostojić, S., & Pavlić, S. D. (2025) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app15189940 · Cited by 19
Hall, M. S., Decker, J. T., & Shea, L. D. (2020) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.120189 · Cited by 20
Data Denoising and Post-Denoising Corrections in Single Cell RNA Sequencing
Agarwal, D., Wang, J., & Zhang, N. R. (2020) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/19-sts7560 · Cited by 19
Nox4 promotes endothelial differentiation through chromatin remodeling
Hahner, F., Moll, F., Warwick, T., Hebchen, D. M., Buchmann, G., Epah, J., Abplanalp, W. T., Schader, T., Günther, S., Gilsbach, R., et al. (2022) · Redox Biology · doi:10.1016/j.redox.2022.102381 · Cited by 19
Decoding brain memory formation by single-cell RNA sequencing
Sardoo, A. M., Zhang, S., Ferraro, T. N., Keck, T. M., & Chen, Y. (2022) · Briefings in Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bib/bbac412 · Cited by 20
Single-cell and spatial sequencing application in pathology
Kim, Y., Choi, J., & Lee, S. H. (2023) · Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine · doi:10.4132/jptm.2022.12.12 · Cited by 20
Hu, H., & Quon, G. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-53971-2 · Cited by 19
Profiling of Single‐Cell Transcriptomes
Chen, W., Gardeux, V., Meireles-Filho, A. C. A., & Deplancke, B. (2017) · Current Protocols in Mouse Biology · doi:10.1002/cpmo.30 · Cited by 16
Kidney and organoid single-cell transcriptomics: the end of the beginning
Wilson, P. C., & Humphreys, B. D. (2019) · Pediatric Nephrology · doi:10.1007/s00467-018-4177-y · Cited by 20
Dissecting the human immune system with single cell RNA sequencing technology
Xu, G., Liu, Y., Li, H., Liu, L., Zhang, S., & Zhang, Z. (2019) · Journal of Leukocyte Biology · doi:10.1002/jlb.5mr1019-179r · Cited by 19
Xu, H., Yang, X., Huang, W., Ma, Y., Hao, K., Zou, L., Yang, Q., & Jiao, B. (2020) · Stem Cells · doi:10.1002/stem.3274 · Cited by 18
Exploring Additional Valuable Information From Single-Cell RNA-Seq Data
Li, Y., Xu, Q., Wu, D., & Chen, G. (2020) · Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology · doi:10.3389/fcell.2020.593007 · Cited by 20
Bosi, E., Marselli, L., Luca, C. D., Suleiman, M., Tesi, M., Ibberson, M. R., Eizirik, D. L., Cnop, M., & Marchetti, P. (2020) · NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/nargab/lqaa097 · Cited by 18
Fibroblast and Myofibroblast Subtypes: Single Cell Sequencing
Soliman, H. S., Tung, L. W., & Rossi, F. M. V. (2021) · Methods in molecular biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-1382-5_4 · Cited by 20
Unsupervised capture and profiling of rare immune cells using multi-directional magnetic ratcheting
Murray, C., Miwa, H., Dhar, M., Park, D. E., Pao, E., Martinez, J., Kaanumalle, S., Loghin, E., Graf, J. F., Rhaddassi, K., et al. (2018) · Lab on a Chip · doi:10.1039/c8lc00518d · Cited by 19
Zhou, L., Wen, R., Bai, C., Li, Z., Zheng, K., Yu, Y., Zhang, T., Jia, H., Peng, Z., Zhu, X., et al. (2024) · Cancer Letters · doi:10.1016/j.canlet.2024.217181 · Cited by 19
Yao, Y., Luo, Y., Liang, X., Zhong, L., Wang, Y., Hong, Z., Song, C., Xu, Z., Wang, J., & Zhang, M. (2025) · Stem Cell Research & Therapy · doi:10.1186/s13287-025-04242-4 · Cited by 21
From valence encoding to motivated behavior: A focus on the nucleus accumbens circuitry
Vieitas‐Gaspar, N., Soares‐Cunha, C., & Rodrigues, A. J. (2025) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2025.106125 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Ziegenhain, C., Vieth, B., Parekh, S., Reinius, B., Guillaumet-Adkins, A., Smets, M., Leonhardt, H., Heyn, H., Hellmann, I., & Enard, W.
- Affiliations
- Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
- Ludwig Cancer Research (BE)
- Universitat Pompeu Fabra (ES)
- Center for Integrated Protein Science Munich (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Enard, Wolfgang
- ORCID
- Venue
- Molecular Cell
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-02
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 631-643.e4
- ISSN
- 1097-2765 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2887910031
- Cited by
- 1,494
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 86 · 2025: 156 · 2024: 158 · 2023: 152 · 2022: 160 · 2021: 219 · 2020: 197 · 2019: 174 · 2018: 125 · 2017: 60
- FWCI
- 63.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Molecular Cell (publishedVersion)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Repositori digital de la UPF (Universitat Pompeu Fabra) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- RECERCAT (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Annals of Hematology
- Funders
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) (SFB1243, A01/A14/A15)
- Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
- Keywords
- single-cell RNA sequencing, mouse embryonic stem cells, Drop-seq, SmartSeq2, SMART-seq, unique molecular identifiers, sequencing depth, power simulation, cost efficiency, transcriptome quantification
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Base Sequence, Cell Line, Computer Simulation, Cost-Benefit Analysis, RNA, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Models, Economic, Mice, Embryonic Stem Cells, Single-Cell Analysis, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
