PreprintCited by 122Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGene expression and cancer classificationGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A comparison of marker gene selection methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data

Open access
Pullin, Jeffrey M., McCarthy, Davis J.·2022·Genome biology

Abstract

The development of single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) has enabled scientists to catalogue and probe the transcriptional heterogeneity of individual cells in unprecedented detail. A common step in the analysis of scRNA-seq data is the selection of so-called marker genes, most commonly to enable annotation of the biological cell types present in the sample. In this paper we benchmarked 56 computational methods for selecting marker genes in scRNA-seq data. The performance of the methods was compared using 10 real scRNA-seq datasets and over 170 additional simulated datasets. Methods were compared on their ability to recover simulated and expert-annotated marker genes, the predictive performance and characteristics of the gene sets they select, their memory usage and speed and their implementation quality. In addition, various case studies were used to scrutinise the most commonly used methods, highlighting issues and inconsistencies. Overall, we present a comprehensive evaluation of methods for selecting marker genes in scRNA-seq data. Our results highlight the efficacy of simple methods, especially the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Student’s t-test and logistic regression. All code used in the evaluation, including an extensible Snakemake pipeline, is available at: https://gitlab.svi.edu.au/biocellgen-public/mage_2020_marker-gene-benchmarking .

Overview

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 · 10.1101/2022.05.09.490241

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 72 references

1 of the 72 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. 10.1038/s41592-019-0535-3 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1038/s41467-021-25960-2 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1016/j.cell.2021.04.048 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.2307/2346101 · DOI
  5. 10.1186/s12859-020-03641-z · DOI
  6. Hadley Wickham . ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag New York, 2016. ISBN 978-3-319-24277-4. URL https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org.
  7. 10.12688/f1000research.9501.2 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Pullin, J. M., & McCarthy, D. J.
Affiliations
The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
McCarthy, Davis J.
Venue
Genome biology
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2022-05-10
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
56-56
ISSN
1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4392167979
Cited by
122
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 43 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 10
FWCI
15.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Genome biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Baker Foundation (GNT1162829)
  • University of Melbourne
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1162829, 1112681, 1195595)
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
marker gene selection, single-cell RNA sequencing, benchmarking, cell type annotation, Mann-Whitney test, Student's t-test, logistic regression, simulated data, computational performance
MeSH terms
Exome Sequencing, Software, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Gene Expression Profiling, 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