Cited by 709Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications

Quantitative assessment of single-cell RNA-sequencing methods

Open access
Wu, Angela R, Neff, Norma F, Kalisky, Tomer, Dalerba, Piero, Treutlein, Barbara, Rothenberg, Michael E, Mburu, Francis M, Mantalas, Gary L +3 more·2014·Nature Methods

Abstract

Interest in single-cell whole-transcriptome analysis is growing rapidly, especially for profiling rare or heterogeneous populations of cells. We compared commercially available single-cell RNA amplification methods with both microliter and nanoliter volumes, using sequence from bulk total RNA and multiplexed quantitative PCR as benchmarks to systematically evaluate the sensitivity and accuracy of various single-cell RNA-seq approaches. We show that single-cell RNA-seq can be used to perform accurate quantitative transcriptome measurement in individual cells with a relatively small number of sequencing reads and that sequencing large numbers of single cells can recapitulate bulk transcriptome complexity.

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 · 10.1038/nmeth.2694

Cites

36 of 36 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?

  • The C1 platform has advantages over droplet-based platforms: smaller samples can be processed and capture efficiency of genes and RNA molecules is markedly higher.

    “The automated C1 microfluidic platform (Fluidigm), while more expensive per sample, has been shown to confer several advantages over platforms that make use of droplets to capture single cells321. In particular, smaller samples can be processed using the C1 (when cell numbers are limiting), and the C1 capture efficiency of genes (and RNA molecules) is markedly higher.”
  • 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.

    “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.”
  • The optimal read depths were ~10,000 in most evaluations, relatively low compared to previous recommendations.

    “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.”

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
Wu, A. R., Neff, N. F., Kalisky, T., Dalerba, P., Treutlein, B., Rothenberg, M. E., Mburu, F. M., Mantalas, G. L., Sim, S., Clarke, M. F., & Quake, S. R.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Quake, Stephen R
Venue
Nature Methods
Published
2013-10-20
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
41-46
ISSN
  • 1548-7091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-7105
OpenAlex
W2171501288
Cited by
696
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 77 · 2017: 109 · 2016: 76 · 2015: 65 · 2014: 44 · 2013: 4
FWCI
28.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U01HL099995, U01HL099999)
  • National Cancer Institute (P01CA139490, U01CA154209)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (RC4NS073015)
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-cell RNA sequencing, method comparison, sensitivity, accuracy, reproducibility
MeSH terms
Electronic Data Processing, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Gene Expression Regulation, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Gene Expression Profiling, Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques, Microfluidics, HCT116 Cells, Single-Cell Analysis, Transcriptome

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