Cited by 693Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGene expression and cancer classificationGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

Classification of low quality cells from single-cell RNA-seq data

Open access
Ilicic, Tomislav, Kim, Jong Kyoung, Kolodziejczyk, Aleksandra A., Bagger, Frederik Otzen, McCarthy, Davis James, Marioni, John C., Teichmann, Sarah A.·2016·Genome Biology

Abstract

Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) has broad applications across biomedical research. One of the key challenges is to ensure that only single, live cells are included in downstream analysis, as the inclusion of compromised cells inevitably affects data interpretation. Here, we present a generic approach for processing scRNA-seq data and detecting low quality cells, using a curated set of over 20 biological and technical features. Our approach improves classification accuracy by over 30 % compared to traditional methods when tested on over 5,000 cells, including CD4+ T cells, bone marrow dendritic cells, and mouse embryonic stem cells.

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/s13059-016-0888-1

Cites

50 of 50 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?

  • Cells with a high fraction of reads mapping to the mitochondrial genome (>10%) or the Rn45s repeat (>5%) were filtered out as likely dead cells.

    “Additionally, we filtered out cells with a high fraction of reads mapping to the mitochondrial genome (>10%) or the Rn45s repeat (>5%) as likely dead cells (Ilicic et al. 2016).”

    From Murine single-cell RNA-seq reveals cell-identity- and tissue-specific trajectories of aging (2019) · cites this paper as Ilicic et al. 2016

    The Results section (‘Biological features of low quality cells’; page unavailable) reports a higher proportion of reads from mitochondrial genes in broken cells, supporting the mitochondrial part of the rationale. Our copy does not support the >10% mitochondrial or >5% Rn45s cutoffs, or identify Rn45s reads as a marker of dead cells. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Violations of the single-cell-per-droplet assumption are common in practice.

    “Violations of this assumption, which may distort the interpretation of scRNA-seq data, are common in practice.”

    From SoupX removes ambient RNA contamination from droplet-based single-cell RNA sequencing data (2020) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Background (page unavailable) says some scRNA-seq capture sites, including droplets, may contain multiple cells and that these cells can lead to misinterpretation. The Discussion (page unavailable) reports up to 30% multiple-cell captures in a Fluidigm study, but that figure concerns microfluidic capture sites, not droplets; the paper does not establish that single-cell-per-droplet violations are common. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Technical quality features are highly correlated with biological cell type.

    “a recent study44 reported that technical quality features were highly correlated with biological cell type.”
  • Some methods adapt well-established tools previously used in bulk genomics to the particular challenges of noise and scale in single-cell data, whereas others are designed specifically for single-cell data.

    “Some of these methods adapt well-established tools previously used in bulk genomics to the particular challenges of noise and scale in single-cell data1,44,89,90,105, whereas others are designed specifically for single-cell data71,93,135,137.”
  • Cell QC is commonly performed based on three QC covariates: count depth, number of genes per barcode, and fraction of mitochondrial genes per barcode.

    “Cell QC is commonly performed based on three QC covariates: the number of counts per barcode (count depth), the number of genes per barcode, and the fraction of counts from mitochondrial genes per barcode (Ilicic et al, 2016; Griffiths et al, 2018).”

    From Current best practices in single-cell RNA-seq analysis: a tutorial (2019) · cites this paper as Ilicic et al, 2016

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: 1

  1. [36]Islam S Zeisel A Joost S La Manno G Zajac P Kasper M Quantitative single-cell RNA-seq with unique molecular identifiers Nat Meth 2013 11 163 6 10.1038/nmeth.2772 24363023 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ilicic, T., Kim, J. K., Kolodziejczyk, A. A., Bagger, F. O., McCarthy, D. J., Marioni, J. C., & Teichmann, S. A.
Affiliations
  • European Bioinformatics Institute (GB)
  • National Health Service (GB)
Corresponding author
Teichmann, Sarah A.
Venue
Genome Biology
Published
2016-02-17
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
29-29
ISSN
  • 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-760X
OpenAlex
W2286142055
Cited by
693
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 43 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 81 · 2023: 82 · 2022: 108 · 2021: 91 · 2020: 72 · 2019: 68 · 2018: 51 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 1
FWCI
27.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genome biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
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-cell RNA sequencing, cell quality control, cell classification, CD4+ T cells, dendritic cells, mouse embryonic stem cells, data processing
MeSH terms
Animals, Base Sequence, Bone Marrow Cells, Dendritic Cells, RNA, CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Gene Expression Profiling, Mice, Embryonic Stem Cells, 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