Cargando…

The effect of background noise and its removal on the analysis of single-cell expression data

BACKGROUND: In droplet-based single-cell and single-nucleus RNA-seq experiments, not all reads associated with one cell barcode originate from the encapsulated cell. Such background noise is attributed to spillage from cell-free ambient RNA or barcode swapping events. RESULTS: Here, we characterize...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Janssen, Philipp, Kliesmete, Zane, Vieth, Beate, Adiconis, Xian, Simmons, Sean, Marshall, Jamie, McCabe, Cristin, Heyn, Holger, Levin, Joshua Z., Enard, Wolfgang, Hellmann, Ines
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10278251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37337297
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-023-02978-x
_version_ 1785060443180498944
author Janssen, Philipp
Kliesmete, Zane
Vieth, Beate
Adiconis, Xian
Simmons, Sean
Marshall, Jamie
McCabe, Cristin
Heyn, Holger
Levin, Joshua Z.
Enard, Wolfgang
Hellmann, Ines
author_facet Janssen, Philipp
Kliesmete, Zane
Vieth, Beate
Adiconis, Xian
Simmons, Sean
Marshall, Jamie
McCabe, Cristin
Heyn, Holger
Levin, Joshua Z.
Enard, Wolfgang
Hellmann, Ines
author_sort Janssen, Philipp
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In droplet-based single-cell and single-nucleus RNA-seq experiments, not all reads associated with one cell barcode originate from the encapsulated cell. Such background noise is attributed to spillage from cell-free ambient RNA or barcode swapping events. RESULTS: Here, we characterize this background noise exemplified by three scRNA-seq and two snRNA-seq replicates of mouse kidneys. For each experiment, cells from two mouse subspecies are pooled, allowing to identify cross-genotype contaminating molecules and thus profile background noise. Background noise is highly variable across replicates and cells, making up on average 3–35% of the total counts (UMIs) per cell and we find that noise levels are directly proportional to the specificity and detectability of marker genes. In search of the source of background noise, we find multiple lines of evidence that the majority of background molecules originates from ambient RNA. Finally, we use our genotype-based estimates to evaluate the performance of three methods (CellBender, DecontX, SoupX) that are designed to quantify and remove background noise. We find that CellBender provides the most precise estimates of background noise levels and also yields the highest improvement for marker gene detection. By contrast, clustering and classification of cells are fairly robust towards background noise and only small improvements can be achieved by background removal that may come at the cost of distortions in fine structure. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings help to better understand the extent, sources and impact of background noise in single-cell experiments and provide guidance on how to deal with it. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13059-023-02978-x.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10278251
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102782512023-06-20 The effect of background noise and its removal on the analysis of single-cell expression data Janssen, Philipp Kliesmete, Zane Vieth, Beate Adiconis, Xian Simmons, Sean Marshall, Jamie McCabe, Cristin Heyn, Holger Levin, Joshua Z. Enard, Wolfgang Hellmann, Ines Genome Biol Research BACKGROUND: In droplet-based single-cell and single-nucleus RNA-seq experiments, not all reads associated with one cell barcode originate from the encapsulated cell. Such background noise is attributed to spillage from cell-free ambient RNA or barcode swapping events. RESULTS: Here, we characterize this background noise exemplified by three scRNA-seq and two snRNA-seq replicates of mouse kidneys. For each experiment, cells from two mouse subspecies are pooled, allowing to identify cross-genotype contaminating molecules and thus profile background noise. Background noise is highly variable across replicates and cells, making up on average 3–35% of the total counts (UMIs) per cell and we find that noise levels are directly proportional to the specificity and detectability of marker genes. In search of the source of background noise, we find multiple lines of evidence that the majority of background molecules originates from ambient RNA. Finally, we use our genotype-based estimates to evaluate the performance of three methods (CellBender, DecontX, SoupX) that are designed to quantify and remove background noise. We find that CellBender provides the most precise estimates of background noise levels and also yields the highest improvement for marker gene detection. By contrast, clustering and classification of cells are fairly robust towards background noise and only small improvements can be achieved by background removal that may come at the cost of distortions in fine structure. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings help to better understand the extent, sources and impact of background noise in single-cell experiments and provide guidance on how to deal with it. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13059-023-02978-x. BioMed Central 2023-06-19 /pmc/articles/PMC10278251/ /pubmed/37337297 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-023-02978-x Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Janssen, Philipp
Kliesmete, Zane
Vieth, Beate
Adiconis, Xian
Simmons, Sean
Marshall, Jamie
McCabe, Cristin
Heyn, Holger
Levin, Joshua Z.
Enard, Wolfgang
Hellmann, Ines
The effect of background noise and its removal on the analysis of single-cell expression data
title The effect of background noise and its removal on the analysis of single-cell expression data
title_full The effect of background noise and its removal on the analysis of single-cell expression data
title_fullStr The effect of background noise and its removal on the analysis of single-cell expression data
title_full_unstemmed The effect of background noise and its removal on the analysis of single-cell expression data
title_short The effect of background noise and its removal on the analysis of single-cell expression data
title_sort effect of background noise and its removal on the analysis of single-cell expression data
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10278251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37337297
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-023-02978-x
work_keys_str_mv AT janssenphilipp theeffectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT kliesmetezane theeffectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT viethbeate theeffectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT adiconisxian theeffectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT simmonssean theeffectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT marshalljamie theeffectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT mccabecristin theeffectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT heynholger theeffectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT levinjoshuaz theeffectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT enardwolfgang theeffectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT hellmannines theeffectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT janssenphilipp effectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT kliesmetezane effectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT viethbeate effectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT adiconisxian effectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT simmonssean effectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT marshalljamie effectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT mccabecristin effectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT heynholger effectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT levinjoshuaz effectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT enardwolfgang effectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata
AT hellmannines effectofbackgroundnoiseanditsremovalontheanalysisofsinglecellexpressiondata