Cited by 93Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGene expression and cancer classificationGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

Enhancing droplet-based single-nucleus RNA-seq resolution using the semi-supervised machine learning classifier DIEM

Open access
Alvarez, Marcus, Rahmani, Elior, Jew, Brandon, Garske, Kristina M., Miao, Zong, Benhammou, Jihane N., Ye, Chun Jimmie, Pisegna, Joseph R. +3 more·2020·Scientific Reports

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Single-nucleus RNA sequencing (snRNA-seq) measures gene expression in individual nuclei instead of cells, allowing for unbiased cell type characterization in solid tissues. We observe that snRNA-seq is commonly subject to contamination by high amounts of ambient RNA, which can lead to biased downstream analyses, such as identification of spurious cell types if overlooked. We present a novel approach to quantify contamination and filter droplets in snRNA-seq experiments, called Debris Identification using Expectation Maximization (DIEM). Our likelihood-based approach models the gene expression distribution of debris and cell types, which are estimated using EM. We evaluated DIEM using three snRNA-seq data sets: (1) human differentiating preadipocytes in vitro, (2) fresh mouse brain tissue, and (3) human frozen adipose tissue (AT) from six individuals. All three data sets showed evidence of extranuclear RNA contamination, and we observed that existing methods fail to account for contaminated droplets and led to spurious cell types. When compared to filtering using these state of the art methods, DIEM better removed droplets containing high levels of extranuclear RNA and led to higher quality clusters. Although DIEM was designed for snRNA-seq, our clustering strategy also successfully filtered single-cell RNA-seq data. To conclude, our novel method DIEM removes debris-contaminated droplets from single-cell-based data fast and effectively, leading to cleaner downstream analysis. Our code is freely available for use at https://github.com/marcalva/diem .

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/s41598-020-67513-5

Cites

8 of 8 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?

  • Excessive mitochondrial and ribosomal RNA can overwhelm sequencing data, reducing depth of informative transcripts and hindering detection of low-abundance genes.

    “Excessive levels of contaminating mitochondrial and ribosomal RNA can overwhelm sequencing data, reducing the depth of informative transcripts and hindering the detection of low-abundance genes[36].”

    From Comparative analysis of nuclei isolation methods for brain single-nucleus RNA sequencing (2026) · cites this paper as [36]

    The Introduction and Results (pages not provided) identify mitochondrial RNA as background contamination and report that it can bias expression and drive spurious clusters. They do not establish that ribosomal RNA contamination overwhelms sequencing data, reduces informative-transcript depth, or hinders detection of low-abundance genes; a search for “ribosomal” found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. [2]Baron M A single-cell transcriptomic map of the human and mouse pancreas reveals inter- and intra-cell population structure Cell Syst. 2016 3 e4.346 e4.360 PMC5228327 27667365
  2. [3]Macosko EZ Highly parallel genome-wide expression profiling of individual cells using nanoliter droplets Cell 2015 161 1202 1214 10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.002 26000488 PMC4481139 · DOI · Paper page
  3. [6]Krishnaswami SR Using single nuclei for RNA-seq to capture the transcriptome of postmortem neurons Nat. Protoc. 2016 11 499 10.1038/nprot.2016.015 26890679 PMC4941947 · DOI · Paper page
  4. [7]Nguyen QH Pervolarakis N Nee K Kessenbrock K Experimental considerations for single-cell RNA sequencing approaches Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2018 6 108 10.3389/fcell.2018.00108 30234113 PMC6131190 · DOI · Paper page
  5. [8]Hu P Dissecting cell-type composition and activity-dependent transcriptional state in mammalian brains by massively parallel single-nucleus RNA-Seq Mol. Cell 2017 68 1006 1015.e7 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.11.017 29220646 PMC5743496 · DOI · Paper page
  6. [10]Lake BB Neuronal subtypes and diversity revealed by single-nucleus RNA sequencing of the human brain Science 2016 352 1586 1590 10.1126/science.aaf1204 27339989 PMC5038589 · DOI · Paper page
  7. [11]Zeng W Single-nucleus RNA-seq of differentiating human myoblasts reveals the extent of fate heterogeneity Nucleic Acids Res. 2016 44 e158 27566152 PMC5137429
  8. [12]Lun ATL EmptyDrops: distinguishing cells from empty droplets in droplet-based single-cell RNA sequencing data Genome Biol. 2019 20 63 10.1186/s13059-019-1662-y 30902100 PMC6431044 · DOI
  9. [14]Do CB Batzoglou S What is the expectation maximization algorithm? Nat. Biotechnol. 2008 26 897 899 10.1038/nbt1406 18688245 · DOI
  10. [15]Nigam K Mccallum AK Thrun S Mitchell T Text classification from labeled and unlabeled documents using EM Mach. Learn. 2000 39 103 134 10.1023/A:1007692713085 · DOI · Paper page
  11. [17]La Manno G RNA velocity of single cells Nature 2018 560 494 498 10.1038/s41586-018-0414-6 30089906 PMC6130801 · DOI · Paper page
  12. [18]Miyagawa R Identification of cis- and trans-acting factors involved in the localization of MALAT-1 noncoding RNA to nuclear speckles RNA 2012 18 738 741 10.1261/rna.028639.111 22355166 PMC3312561 · DOI
  13. [20]Stuart T Comprehensive integration of single-cell data Cell 2019 177 1888 1902.e21 10.1016/j.cell.2019.05.031 31178118 PMC6687398 · DOI · Paper page
  14. [21]Ziegler-Heitbrock HWL Ulevitch RJ CD14: cell surface receptor and differentiation marker Immunol. Today 1993 14 121 125 10.1016/0167-5699(93)90212-4 7682078 · DOI
  15. [22]Wu H Kirita Y Donnelly EL Humphreys BD Advantages of single-nucleus over single-cell RNA sequencing of adult kidney: rare cell types and novel cell states revealed in fibrosis J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2019 30 23 32 10.1681/ASN.2018090912 30510133 PMC6317600 · DOI · Paper page
  16. [23]Frankish A GENCODE reference annotation for the human and mouse genomes Nucleic Acids Res. 2019 47 D766 D773 10.1093/nar/gky955 30357393 PMC6323946 · DOI
  17. [24]Li H The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools Bioinformatics 2009 25 2078 2079 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352 19505943 PMC2723002 · DOI · Paper page
  18. [25]Benaglia T Chauveau D Hunter DR Young DS Mixtools: an R package for analyzing finite mixture models J. Stat. Softw. 2009 32 1 29 10.18637/jss.v032.i06 · DOI
  19. [26]McCarthy DJ Chen Y Smyth GK Differential expression analysis of multifactor RNA-Seq experiments with respect to biological variation Nucleic Acids Res. 2012 40 4288 4297 10.1093/nar/gks042 22287627 PMC3378882 · DOI · Paper page
  20. [27]Robinson MD McCarthy DJ Smyth GK edgeR: a Bioconductor package for differential expression analysis of digital gene expression data Bioinformatics 2010 26 139 140 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp616 19910308 PMC2796818 · DOI · Paper page
  21. [28]Biernacki C Celeux G Govaert G Choosing starting values for the EM algorithm for getting the highest likelihood in multivariate Gaussian mixture models Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 2003 41 561 575 10.1016/S0167-9473(02)00163-9 · DOI
  22. [29]Steinley D Brusco MJ Evaluating mixture modeling for clustering: recommendations and cautions Psychol. Methods 2011 16 63 79 10.1037/a0022673 21319900 · DOI
  23. [30]McLachlan GJ Lee SX Rathnayake SI Finite mixture models Annu. Rev. Stat. Appl. 2019 6 355 378 10.1146/annurev-statistics-031017-100325 · DOI
  24. [31]Brennecke P Accounting for technical noise in single-cell RNA-seq experiments Nat. Methods 2013 10 1093 1095 10.1038/nmeth.2645 24056876 · DOI · Paper page
  25. [33]Becht E Dimensionality reduction for visualizing single-cell data using UMAP Nat. Biotechnol. 2019 37 38 10.1038/nbt.4314 30531897 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alvarez, M., Rahmani, E., Jew, B., Garske, K. M., Miao, Z., Benhammou, J. N., Ye, C. J., Pisegna, J. R., Pietiläinen, K. H., Halperin, E., & Pajukanta, P.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of Helsinki (FI)
Corresponding author
Pajukanta, Päivi
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2020-07-03
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
11019-11019
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3038441966
Cited by
93
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 5
FWCI
4.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1705197, T32HG002536, 1650604)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (T32HG002536)
  • American Heart Association (19PRE34430112)
  • Helsingin Yliopisto (272376, 314383, 266286)
  • Suomen Lääketieteen Säätiö (314383, 272376, 266286)
  • Academy of Finland (#266286, #315035, #314383, 272376, 266286, 314383, 315035, 272376, 266286, 314383, 272376)
  • Novo Nordisk
  • Novo Nordisk Fonden (NNF17OC0027232)
  • Diabetestutkimussäätiö (272376, 314383, 266286)
  • National Institutes of Health (DGE-1650604, DKP3041301, HL‐28481, DK41301, ULTR001881, UL1TR001881)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL095056, F31HL142180, P01HL028481)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH122569, R01MH115979)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG010505, T32HG002536)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R25GM112625)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (U01DK105561, P30DK041301)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (ULTR001881)
  • National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (R56MD013312)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
single-nucleus RNA sequencing, Diem, expectation-maximization algorithm, semi-supervised classification, adipose tissue, brain tissue, preadipocytes, cell type annotation
MeSH terms
Supervised Machine Learning, Adipose Tissue, Animals, Brain, Humans, Likelihood Functions, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Gene Expression Profiling, Mice, 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