Cited by 58Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGene expression and cancer classificationBioinformatics and Genomic Networks

FastProject: a tool for low-dimensional analysis of single-cell RNA-Seq data

Open access
DeTomaso, David, Yosef, Nir·2016·BMC Bioinformatics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: A key challenge in the emerging field of single-cell RNA-Seq is to characterize phenotypic diversity between cells and visualize this information in an informative manner. A common technique when dealing with high-dimensional data is to project the data to 2 or 3 dimensions for visualization. However, there are a variety of methods to achieve this result and once projected, it can be difficult to ascribe biological significance to the observed features. Additionally, when analyzing single-cell data, the relationship between cells can be obscured by technical confounders such as variable gene capture rates. Results: To aid in the analysis and interpretation of single-cell RNA-Seq data, we have developed FastProject, a software tool which analyzes a gene expression matrix and produces a dynamic output report in which two-dimensional projections of the data can be explored. Annotated gene sets (referred to as gene ‘signatures’) are incorporated so that features in the projections can be understood in relation to the biological processes they might represent. FastProject provides a novel method of scoring each cell against a gene signature so as to minimize the effect of missed transcripts as well as a method to rank signature-projection pairings so that meaningful associations can be quickly identified. Additionally, FastProject is written with a modular architecture and designed to serve as a platform for incorporating and comparing new projection methods and gene selection algorithms. Conclusions: Here we present FastProject, a software package for two-dimensional visualization of single cell data, which utilizes a plethora of projection methods and provides a way to systematically investigate the biological relevance of these low dimensional representations by incorporating domain knowledge.

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 · 10.1186/s12859-016-1176-5

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • Factors defining cell identity may be discrete categories, continuous spectra, or combinations of discrete and continuous categories.

    “These factors may not only be the discrete categories that are often assumed when classifying cells into major types4,30,94 but may also represent a continuous spectrum1, or a combination of discrete and continuous categories36,95–97,227.”
  • SPADE down-sampling makes rare cell types as prevalent as abundant types, increasing the chance that rare types form their own clusters rather than becoming outliers, at the cost of lower signal-to-noise.

    “This increases the probability that rare cell types will form their own clusters rather than becoming outliers to clusters of more abundant types, albeit at the cost of a decreased biological signal-to-noise ratio.”

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
DeTomaso, D., & Yosef, N.
Affiliations
University of California, Berkeley (US)
Venue
BMC Bioinformatics
Published
2016-08-23
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
315-315
ISSN
1471-2105 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2342016684
Cited by
58
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1
FWCI
5.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (U01MH105979, U01HG007910, T32)
  • BASF Corporation (CARA)
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 › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Keywords
single-cell RNA sequencing, dimensionality reduction, gene expression signatures, visualization tools, gene selection
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Glioblastoma, Humans, Software, Biomarkers, Tumor, Models, Statistical, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Computational Biology, Gene Expression Profiling, Single-Cell Analysis, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing

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