Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

0 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

The comparison of high-throughput single-cell RNA-seq methods

ABSTRACT: Here we compare the performance of these three approaches (inDrop, Drop-seq and 10x) using the same kind of sample with a unified data processing pipeline. We generated 2-3 replicates for each method using lymphoblastoid cell line GM12891. The average sequencing depth was around 50-60k reads per cell barcode. We also developed a versatile and rapid data processing workflow and applied it for all datasets. Cell capture efficiency, effective read ratio, barcode detection error and transcript detection sensitivity were analyzed as well.

ORGANISM(S): Homo sapiens

PROVIDER: GSE111912 | GEO | 2018/06/14

REPOSITORIES: GEO

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Dataset's files

Source:

			Action	DRS
		Other

Items per page:

1 - 1 of 1

Similar Datasets

Project description:Barcode-free NGS error validation

| PRJNA503316 | ENA

Systematic comparison of high-throughput single-cell RNA-seq methods for immune cell profiling [PBMC_10X]

Project description:We systematically benchmarked seven high-throughput single-cell RNA-seq methods. We prepared 21 libraries under identical conditions of a defined mixture of two human and two murine lymphocyte cell lines, simulating heterogeneity across immune-cell types and cell sizes. We evaluate methods by their cell recovery rate, library efficiency, sensitivity, and ability to recover expression signatures for each cell type. We observed higher mRNA detection sensitivity with the 10x Genomics 5’ v1 and 3’ v3 methods. We demonstrate that these methods have fewer drop-out events which facilitates the identification of differentially-expressed genes and improves the concordance of single-cell profiles to immune bulk RNA-seq signatures.

2021-01-15 | GSE164402 | GEO

Systematic comparison of high-throughput single-cell RNA-seq methods for immune cell profiling [icell8]

2021-01-15 | GSE163792 | GEO

Systematic comparison of high-throughput single-cell RNA-seq methods for immune cell profiling [ddSEQ]

2021-01-15 | GSE163788 | GEO

Systematic comparison of high-throughput single-cell RNA-seq methods for immune cell profiling [bulk]

2021-01-15 | GSE163787 | GEO

Systematic comparison of high-throughput single-cell RNA-seq methods for immune cell profiling [DS]

2021-01-15 | GSE163785 | GEO

Systematic comparison of high-throughput single-cell RNA-seq methods for immune cell profiling [10x]

2021-01-15 | GSE163781 | GEO

Comparative analysis of single-cell RNA sequencing methods

Project description:Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) offers new possibilities to address biological and medical questions. However, systematic comparisons of the performance of diverse scRNA-seq protocols are lacking. We generated data from 583 mouse embryonic stem cells to evaluate six prominent scRNA-seq methods: CEL-seq2, Drop-seq, MARS-seq, SCRB-seq, Smart-seq and Smart-seq2. While Smart-seq2 detected the most genes per cell and across cells, CEL-seq2, Drop-seq, MARS-seq and SCRB-seq quantified mRNA levels with less amplification noise due to the use of unique molecular identifiers (UMIs). Power simulations at different sequencing depths showed that Drop-seq is more cost-efficient for transcriptome quantification of large numbers of cells, while MARS-seq, SCRB-seq and Smart-seq2 are more efficient when analyzing fewer cells. Our quantitative comparison offers the basis for an informed choice among six prominent scRNA-seq methods and provides a framework for benchmarking further improvements of scRNA-seq protocols.

2016-09-09 | GSE75790 | GEO

High throughput error correction using dual nucleotide dimer blocks allows direct single-cell nanopore transcriptome sequencing

Project description:Droplet-based single-cell sequencing techniques have provided unprecedented insight into cellular heterogeneities within tissues. However, these approaches only allow for the measurement of the distal parts of a transcript following short-read sequencing. Therefore, splicing and sequence diversity information is lost for the majority of the transcript. The application of long-read Nanopore sequencing to droplet-based methods is challenging because of the low base-calling accuracy currently associated with Nanopore sequencing. Although several approaches that use additional short-read sequencing to error-correct the barcode and UMI sequences have been developed, these techniques are limited by the requirement to sequence a library using both short- and long-read sequencing. Here we introduce a novel approach termed single-cell Barcode UMI Correction sequencing (scBUC-seq) to efficiently error-correct barcode and UMI oligonucleotide sequences synthesized by using blocks of dimeric nucleotides. The method can be applied to correct both short-read and long-read sequencing, thereby allowing users to recover more reads per cell that permits direct single-cell Nanopore sequencing for the first time. We illustrate our method by using species-mixing experiments to evaluate barcode assignment accuracy and multiple myeloma cell lines to evaluate differential isoform usage and Ewing’s sarcoma cells to demonstrate Ig fusion transcript analysis.

2021-01-31 | GSE162053 | GEO

Evaluation of Sample Preparation Methods for the Analysis of Reef-Building Corals Using 1H-NMR-based Metabolomics

Project description:The field of metabolomics generally lacks standardized methods for the preparation of samples prior to analysis. This is especially true for metabolomics of reef-building corals, where the handful of studies that have been published employ a range of sample preparation protocols. The utilization of metabolomics may prove essential in understanding coral biology in the face of increasing environmental threats, and an optimized method for preparing coral samples for metabolomics analysis would aid this cause. The current study evaluates three important steps during samples processing of stony corals: (i) metabolite extraction, (ii) metabolism preservation and (iii) subsampling. Results indicate that a modified Bligh and Dyer extraction is more reproducible across multiple coral species compared to methyl tert-butyl ether and methanol extractions, while a methanol extraction is superior for feature detection. Additionally, few differences are detected between spectra from frozen or lyophilized coral samples. Finally, extraction of entire coral nubbins increases feature detection, but decreases throughput and is more susceptible to subsampling error compared to a novel tissue powder subsampling method. Overall, we recommend the use of a modified Bligh and Dyer extraction, lyophilized samples, and analysis of brushed tissue powder for the preparation of reef-building coral samples for 1H NMR metabolomics.

2019-03-20 | MTBLS862 | MetaboLights

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data