Cited by 137Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications

Neuronal ambient RNA contamination causes misinterpreted and masked cell types in brain single-nuclei datasets

Open access
Caglayan, Emre, Liu, Yuxiang, Konopka, Genevieve·2022·Neuron

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Ambient RNA contamination in single-cell and single-nuclei RNA sequencing (snRNA-seq) is a significant problem, but its consequences are poorly understood. Here, we show that ambient RNAs in brain snRNA-seq datasets have a nuclear or non-nuclear origin with distinct gene set signatures. Both ambient RNA signatures are predominantly neuronal, and we find that some previously annotated neuronal cell types are distinguished by ambient RNA contamination. We detect pervasive neuronal ambient RNA contamination in all glial cell types unless glia and neurons are physically separated prior to sequencing. We demonstrate that this contamination can be removed in silico and show that previous single-nuclei RNA-seq-based annotations of immature oligodendrocytes are glial nuclei contaminated with ambient RNAs. After ambient RNA removal, we detect rare, committed oligodendrocyte progenitor cells not annotated in most previous adult human brain datasets. Together, these results provide an in-depth analysis of ambient RNA contamination in brain single-nuclei datasets.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuron.2022.09.010

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Ambient RNA from lysed cells can lead to false positives in gene expression profiles, obscuring true cell type-specific markers.

    “For example, ambient RNA from lysed cells, a ubiquitous issue of scRNA- and snRNA-seq datasets, can lead to false positives in gene expression profiles, obscuring true cell type-specific markers[34, 35].”

    From Comparative analysis of nuclei isolation methods for brain single-nucleus RNA sequencing (2026) · cites this paper as [34]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says freely floating transcripts contaminate endogenous expression profiles and can skew them enough to cause biological misinterpretation. The Results section on glial nuclei (page unavailable) reports ambient RNA markers appearing falsely expressed in those nuclei, supporting the concern about misleading cell-type profiles. Our copy does not establish that the RNA specifically comes from lysed cells, and the paper’s findings focus on brain single-nuclei datasets rather than demonstrating the claim across scRNA- and snRNA-seq datasets generally. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Ambient RNA contamination may distort transcriptomic profiles, leading to the underrepresentation of specific cell types or misclassification of cellular states.

    “This contamination may distort transcriptomic profiles, leading to the underrepresentation of specific cell types or misclassification of cellular states[34, 37].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Caglayan, E., Liu, Y., & Konopka, G.
Affiliations
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Caglayan, Emre
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-12
Volume
110
Issue
24
Pages
4043-4056.e5
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4305016438
Cited by
123
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 3
FWCI
7.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • James S. McDonnell Foundation
  • American Heart Association (915654)
  • University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH103517, MH126481, R01MH103517, R01MH126481)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG011641, HG011641)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS115821, UF1NS115821)
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 › Molecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Keywords
single-nucleus RNA sequencing, brain cell types, oligodendrocyte precursor cells, cell type annotation, human brain
MeSH terms
Adult, Cell Nucleus, Humans, Neurons, RNA, RNA, Small Nuclear, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Solitary Nucleus, Single-Cell Analysis

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.

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