PreprintCited by 1,648Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesGene expression and cancer classification

SoupX removes ambient RNA contamination from droplet based single-cell RNA sequencing data

Open access
Young, Matthew D, Behjati, Sam·2018·GigaScience

Preprint — published as 10.1093/gigascience/giaa151 · Paper page

Abstract

Background: Droplet based single-cell RNA sequence analyses assume all acquired RNAs are endogenous to cells. However, any cell free RNAs contained within the input solution are also captured by these assays. This sequencing of cell free RNA constitutes a background contamination that confounds the biological interpretation of single-cell transcriptomic data. Results: We demonstrate that contamination from this ‘soup’ of cell free RNAs is ubiquitous, with experiment-specific variations in composition and magnitude. We present a method, SoupX, for quantifying the extent of the contamination and estimating ‘background corrected’ cell expression profiles that seamlessly integrate with existing downstream analysis tools. Applying this method to several datasets using multiple droplet sequencing technologies, we demonstrate that its application improves biological interpretation of otherwise misleading data, as well as improving quality control metrics. Conclusions: We present ‘SoupX’, a tool for removing ambient RNA contamination from droplet based single cell RNA sequencing experiments. This tool has broad applicability and its application can improve the biological utility of existing and future data sets. Key Points: The signal from droplet based single cell RNA sequencing is ubiquitously contaminated by capture of ambient mRNA. SoupX is a method to quantify the abundance of these ambient mRNAs and remove them. Correcting for ambient mRNA contamination improves biological interpretation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/303727

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Young, M. D., & Behjati, S.
Affiliations
  • Wellcome Sanger Institute (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Young, Matthew D
Venue
GigaScience
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2018-04-20
Volume
9
Issue
12
ISSN
2047-217X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3114078084
Cited by
1,648
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 386 · 2025: 388 · 2024: 347 · 2023: 212 · 2022: 150 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 1
FWCI
41.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • GigaScience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (110104/Z/15/Z)
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
cell-free RNA, background correction, single-cell transcriptomics, quality control, contamination quantification
MeSH terms
Base Sequence, RNA, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Gene Expression Profiling, 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