Integration-free and cluster-free detection of localized differential gene coexpression in single-cell data with DiCoLo
Abstract
Detecting changes in gene coordination patterns between biological conditions and identifying the cell populations in which these changes occur are key challenges in single-cell analysis. Existing approaches often compare gene coexpression between predefined cell clusters or rely on aligning cells across conditions. These strategies can be suboptimal when changes occur within small subpopulations or when batch effects obscure the underlying biological signal. To address these challenges, we introduce DiCoLo, a framework that identifies genes exhibiting differential colocalization, defined as changes in coordinated expression within localized cell neighborhoods - subsets of highly similar cells in the transcriptomic space. Importantly, DiCoLo does not rely on cell clustering or cross-condition alignment. For each condition, DiCoLo constructs a gene graph using Optimal Transport distances that reflect gene colocalization patterns across the cell manifold. Then, it identifies differential gene programs by detecting changes in connectivity patterns between the gene graphs. We show that DiCoLo robustly identifies differential gene colocalization even under weak signals or complex batch effects, outperforming existing methods across multiple benchmark datasets. When applied to mouse hair follicle development data, DiCoLo reveals coordinated gene programs and emerging cell populations driven by perturbations in morphogen signaling that underlie dermal condensate differentiation. Overall, these results establish DiCoLo as a powerful framework for uncovering localized differential transcriptional coordinated patterns in single-cell data.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
- Authors
- Li, R., Yang, J., Su, P.-C., Jaffe, A., Lindenbaum, O., & Kluger, Y.
- Affiliations
- Yale University (US)
- Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
- Bar-Ilan University (IL)
- Venue
- Genome Research
- Publisher
- Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
- Published
- 2026-10-26
- Pages
- gr.282190.126
- ISSN
- 1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W7223700826
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Genome Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- 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 › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
- Keywords
- genetic colocalization, single-cell transcriptomics, optimal transport, batch effects, cell populations, hair follicle development, morphogen signaling
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