scholarly journals Single-cell data clustering based on sparse optimization and low-rank matrix factorization

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yinlei Hu ◽  
Bin Li ◽  
Falai Chen ◽  
Kun Qu
Keyword(s):  
Single Cell ◽  
Rna Sequencing ◽  
Matrix Factorization ◽  
Data Clustering ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Low Rank ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Rank Matrix ◽  
Single Cell Rna Sequencing ◽  
Low Rank Matrix

Abstract Unsupervised clustering is a fundamental step of single-cell RNA sequencing data analysis. This issue has inspired several clustering methods to classify cells in single-cell RNA sequencing data. However, accurate prediction of the cell clusters remains a substantial challenge. In this study, we propose a new algorithm for single-cell RNA sequencing data clustering based on Sparse Optimization and low-rank matrix factorization (scSO). We applied our scSO algorithm to analyze multiple benchmark datasets and showed that the cluster number predicted by scSO was close to the number of reference cell types and that most cells were correctly classified. Our scSO algorithm is available at https://github.com/QuKunLab/scSO. Overall, this study demonstrates a potent cell clustering approach that can help researchers distinguish cell types in single-cell RNA sequencing data.

scholarly journals Zero-preserving imputation of single-cell RNA-seq data

2022 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
George C. Linderman ◽  
Jun Zhao ◽  
Manolis Roulis ◽  
Piotr Bielecki ◽  
Richard A. Flavell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Cell ◽  
Rna Sequencing ◽  
Low Rank ◽  
Matrix Approximation ◽  
Rna Seq ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Theoretical Justification ◽  
Rank Matrix ◽  
Single Cell Rna Sequencing ◽  
Low Rank Matrix

AbstractA key challenge in analyzing single cell RNA-sequencing data is the large number of false zeros, where genes actually expressed in a given cell are incorrectly measured as unexpressed. We present a method based on low-rank matrix approximation which imputes these values while preserving biologically non-expressed genes (true biological zeros) at zero expression levels. We provide theoretical justification for this denoising approach and demonstrate its advantages relative to other methods on simulated and biological datasets.

scholarly journals Evaluation of single-cell classifiers for single-cell RNA sequencing data sets

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 1581-1595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xinlei Zhao ◽  
Shuang Wu ◽  
Nan Fang ◽  
Xiao Sun ◽  
Jue Fan
Keyword(s):  
Single Cell ◽  
Rna Sequencing ◽  
Reference Data ◽  
Predictive Accuracy ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Marker Genes ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Single Cell Rna Sequencing

Abstract Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) has been rapidly developing and widely applied in biological and medical research. Identification of cell types in scRNA-seq data sets is an essential step before in-depth investigations of their functional and pathological roles. However, the conventional workflow based on clustering and marker genes is not scalable for an increasingly large number of scRNA-seq data sets due to complicated procedures and manual annotation. Therefore, a number of tools have been developed recently to predict cell types in new data sets using reference data sets. These methods have not been generally adapted due to a lack of tool benchmarking and user guidance. In this article, we performed a comprehensive and impartial evaluation of nine classification software tools specifically designed for scRNA-seq data sets. Results showed that Seurat based on random forest, SingleR based on correlation analysis and CaSTLe based on XGBoost performed better than others. A simple ensemble voting of all tools can improve the predictive accuracy. Under nonideal situations, such as small-sized and class-imbalanced reference data sets, tools based on cluster-level similarities have superior performance. However, even with the function of assigning ‘unassigned’ labels, it is still challenging to catch novel cell types by solely using any of the single-cell classifiers. This article provides a guideline for researchers to select and apply suitable classification tools in their analysis workflows and sheds some lights on potential direction of future improvement on classification tools.

scholarly journals Splatter: simulation of single-cell RNA sequencing data

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke Zappia ◽  
Belinda Phipson ◽  
Alicia Oshlack
Keyword(s):  
Single Cell ◽  
Rna Sequencing ◽  
Real Data ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Rna Seq ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Sequencing Technologies ◽  
Simulation Based ◽  
Single Cell Rna Sequencing ◽  
Multiple Cell

AbstractAs single-cell RNA sequencing technologies have rapidly developed, so have analysis methods. Many methods have been tested, developed and validated using simulated datasets. Unfortunately, current simulations are often poorly documented, their similarity to real data is not demonstrated, or reproducible code is not available.Here we present the Splatter Bioconductor package for simple, reproducible and well-documented simulation of single-cell RNA-seq data. Splatter provides an interface to multiple simulation methods including Splat, our own simulation, based on a gamma-Poisson distribution. Splat can simulate single populations of cells, populations with multiple cell types or differentiation paths.

scholarly journals Distinguishing cells from empty droplets in droplet-based single-cell RNA sequencing data

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron T. L. Lun ◽  
Samantha Riesenfeld ◽  
Tallulah Andrews ◽  
Tomas Gomes ◽  
John C. Marioni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Cell ◽  
Rna Sequencing ◽  
Real Data ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Minimum Threshold ◽  
False Discovery ◽  
Distinct Cell ◽  
Single Cell Rna Sequencing ◽  
Unique Molecular Identifier

AbstractDroplet-based single-cell RNA sequencing protocols have dramatically increased the throughput and efficiency of single-cell transcriptomics studies. A key computational challenge when processing these data is to distinguish libraries for real cells from empty droplets. Existing methods for cell calling set a minimum threshold on the total unique molecular identifier (UMI) count for each library, which indiscriminately discards cell libraries with low UMI counts. Here, we describe a new statistical method for calling cells from droplet-based data, based on detecting significant deviations from the expression profile of the ambient solution. Using simulations, we demonstrate that our method has greater power than existing approaches for detecting cell libraries with low UMI counts, while controlling the false discovery rate among detected cells. We also apply our method to real data, where we show that the use of our method results in the retention of distinct cell types that would otherwise have been discarded.

scholarly journals IKAP—Identifying K mAjor cell Population groups in single-cell RNA-sequencing analysis

GigaScience ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yun-Ching Chen ◽  
Abhilash Suresh ◽  
Chingiz Underbayev ◽  
Clare Sun ◽  
Komudi Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Cell ◽  
Rna Sequencing ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Sequencing Analysis ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Peripheral Blood Mononuclear ◽  
Biologically Relevant ◽  
Single Cell Rna Sequencing ◽  
Cell Groups ◽  
Cell Ontology

AbstractBackgroundIn single-cell RNA-sequencing analysis, clustering cells into groups and differentiating cell groups by differentially expressed (DE) genes are 2 separate steps for investigating cell identity. However, the ability to differentiate between cell groups could be affected by clustering. This interdependency often creates a bottleneck in the analysis pipeline, requiring researchers to repeat these 2 steps multiple times by setting different clustering parameters to identify a set of cell groups that are more differentiated and biologically relevant.FindingsTo accelerate this process, we have developed IKAP—an algorithm to identify major cell groups and improve differentiating cell groups by systematically tuning parameters for clustering. We demonstrate that, with default parameters, IKAP successfully identifies major cell types such as T cells, B cells, natural killer cells, and monocytes in 2 peripheral blood mononuclear cell datasets and recovers major cell types in a previously published mouse cortex dataset. These major cell groups identified by IKAP present more distinguishing DE genes compared with cell groups generated by different combinations of clustering parameters. We further show that cell subtypes can be identified by recursively applying IKAP within identified major cell types, thereby delineating cell identities in a multi-layered ontology.ConclusionsBy tuning the clustering parameters to identify major cell groups, IKAP greatly improves the automation of single-cell RNA-sequencing analysis to produce distinguishing DE genes and refine cell ontology using single-cell RNA-sequencing data.

scholarly journals scConsensus: combining supervised and unsupervised clustering for cell type identification in single-cell RNA sequencing data

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bobby Ranjan ◽  
Florian Schmidt ◽  
Wenjie Sun ◽  
Jinyu Park ◽  
Mohammad Amin Honardoost ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Cell ◽  
Rna Sequencing ◽  
Differentially Expressed Genes ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Unsupervised Clustering ◽  
Differentially Expressed ◽  
Consensus Clustering ◽  
Cell Type ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Single Cell Rna Sequencing

Abstract Background Clustering is a crucial step in the analysis of single-cell data. Clusters identified in an unsupervised manner are typically annotated to cell types based on differentially expressed genes. In contrast, supervised methods use a reference panel of labelled transcriptomes to guide both clustering and cell type identification. Supervised and unsupervised clustering approaches have their distinct advantages and limitations. Therefore, they can lead to different but often complementary clustering results. Hence, a consensus approach leveraging the merits of both clustering paradigms could result in a more accurate clustering and a more precise cell type annotation. Results We present scConsensus, an $${\mathbf {R}}$$ R framework for generating a consensus clustering by (1) integrating results from both unsupervised and supervised approaches and (2) refining the consensus clusters using differentially expressed genes. The value of our approach is demonstrated on several existing single-cell RNA sequencing datasets, including data from sorted PBMC sub-populations. Conclusions scConsensus combines the merits of unsupervised and supervised approaches to partition cells with better cluster separation and homogeneity, thereby increasing our confidence in detecting distinct cell types. scConsensus is implemented in $${\mathbf {R}}$$ R and is freely available on GitHub at https://github.com/prabhakarlab/scConsensus.

scholarly journals Characterizing the replicability of cell types defined by single cell RNA-sequencing data using MetaNeighbor

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Crow ◽  
Anirban Paul ◽  
Sara Ballouz ◽  
Z. Josh Huang ◽  
Jesse Gillis
Keyword(s):  
Single Cell ◽  
Rna Sequencing ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Single Cell Rna Sequencing

scholarly journals scConsensus: combining supervised and unsupervised clustering for cell type identification in single-cell RNA sequencing data

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bobby Ranjan ◽  
Florian Schmidt ◽  
Wenjie Sun ◽  
Jinyu Park ◽  
Mohammad Amin Honardoost ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Cell ◽  
Rna Sequencing ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Unsupervised Clustering ◽  
Differentially Expressed ◽  
Consensus Clustering ◽  
Cell Type ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Single Cell Rna Sequencing ◽  
Data Clusters

Clustering is a crucial step in the analysis of single-cell data. Clusters identified using unsupervised clustering are typically annotated to cell types based on differentially expressed genes. In contrast, supervised methods use a reference panel of labelled transcriptomes to guide both clustering and cell type identification. Supervised and unsupervised clustering strategies have their distinct advantages and limitations. Therefore, they can lead to different but often complementary clustering results. Hence, a consensus approach leveraging the merits of both clustering paradigms could result in a more accurate clustering and a more precise cell type annotation. We present scConsensus, an R framework for generating a consensus clustering by (i) integrating the results from both unsupervised and supervised approaches and (ii) refining the consensus clusters using differentially expressed (DE) genes. The value of our approach is demonstrated on several existing single-cell RNA sequencing datasets, including data from sorted PBMC sub-populations. scConsensus is freely available on GitHub at https://github.com/prabhakarlab/scConsensus.

scholarly journals Comparison of computational methods for imputing single-cell RNA-sequencing data

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lihua Zhang ◽  
Shihua Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Single Cell ◽  
Rna Sequencing ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Real Data ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Biological Functions ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Imputation Methods ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Single Cell Rna Sequencing

AbstractSingle-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) is a recent breakthrough technology, which paves the way for measuring RNA levels at single cell resolution to study precise biological functions. One of the main challenges when analyzing scRNA-seq data is the presence of zeros or dropout events, which may mislead downstream analyses. To compensate the dropout effect, several methods have been developed to impute gene expression since the first Bayesian-based method being proposed in 2016. However, these methods have shown very diverse characteristics in terms of model hypothesis and imputation performance. Thus, large-scale comparison and evaluation of these methods is urgently needed now. To this end, we compared eight imputation methods, evaluated their power in recovering original real data, and performed broad analyses to explore their effects on clustering cell types, detecting differentially expressed genes, and reconstructing lineage trajectories in the context of both simulated and real data. Simulated datasets and case studies highlight that there are no one method performs the best in all the situations. Some defects of these methods such as scalability, robustness and unavailability in some situations need to be addressed in future studies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document