Cargando…
A comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data
BACKGROUND: Single-cell transcriptomics is rapidly advancing our understanding of the cellular composition of complex tissues and organisms. A major limitation in most analysis pipelines is the reliance on manual annotations to determine cell identities, which are time-consuming and irreproducible....
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6734286/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31500660 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-019-1795-z |
_version_ | 1783450122277879808 |
---|---|
author | Abdelaal, Tamim Michielsen, Lieke Cats, Davy Hoogduin, Dylan Mei, Hailiang Reinders, Marcel J. T. Mahfouz, Ahmed |
author_facet | Abdelaal, Tamim Michielsen, Lieke Cats, Davy Hoogduin, Dylan Mei, Hailiang Reinders, Marcel J. T. Mahfouz, Ahmed |
author_sort | Abdelaal, Tamim |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Single-cell transcriptomics is rapidly advancing our understanding of the cellular composition of complex tissues and organisms. A major limitation in most analysis pipelines is the reliance on manual annotations to determine cell identities, which are time-consuming and irreproducible. The exponential growth in the number of cells and samples has prompted the adaptation and development of supervised classification methods for automatic cell identification. RESULTS: Here, we benchmarked 22 classification methods that automatically assign cell identities including single-cell-specific and general-purpose classifiers. The performance of the methods is evaluated using 27 publicly available single-cell RNA sequencing datasets of different sizes, technologies, species, and levels of complexity. We use 2 experimental setups to evaluate the performance of each method for within dataset predictions (intra-dataset) and across datasets (inter-dataset) based on accuracy, percentage of unclassified cells, and computation time. We further evaluate the methods’ sensitivity to the input features, number of cells per population, and their performance across different annotation levels and datasets. We find that most classifiers perform well on a variety of datasets with decreased accuracy for complex datasets with overlapping classes or deep annotations. The general-purpose support vector machine classifier has overall the best performance across the different experiments. CONCLUSIONS: We present a comprehensive evaluation of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data. All the code used for the evaluation is available on GitHub (https://github.com/tabdelaal/scRNAseq_Benchmark). Additionally, we provide a Snakemake workflow to facilitate the benchmarking and to support the extension of new methods and new datasets. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13059-019-1795-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6734286 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67342862019-09-12 A comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data Abdelaal, Tamim Michielsen, Lieke Cats, Davy Hoogduin, Dylan Mei, Hailiang Reinders, Marcel J. T. Mahfouz, Ahmed Genome Biol Research BACKGROUND: Single-cell transcriptomics is rapidly advancing our understanding of the cellular composition of complex tissues and organisms. A major limitation in most analysis pipelines is the reliance on manual annotations to determine cell identities, which are time-consuming and irreproducible. The exponential growth in the number of cells and samples has prompted the adaptation and development of supervised classification methods for automatic cell identification. RESULTS: Here, we benchmarked 22 classification methods that automatically assign cell identities including single-cell-specific and general-purpose classifiers. The performance of the methods is evaluated using 27 publicly available single-cell RNA sequencing datasets of different sizes, technologies, species, and levels of complexity. We use 2 experimental setups to evaluate the performance of each method for within dataset predictions (intra-dataset) and across datasets (inter-dataset) based on accuracy, percentage of unclassified cells, and computation time. We further evaluate the methods’ sensitivity to the input features, number of cells per population, and their performance across different annotation levels and datasets. We find that most classifiers perform well on a variety of datasets with decreased accuracy for complex datasets with overlapping classes or deep annotations. The general-purpose support vector machine classifier has overall the best performance across the different experiments. CONCLUSIONS: We present a comprehensive evaluation of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data. All the code used for the evaluation is available on GitHub (https://github.com/tabdelaal/scRNAseq_Benchmark). Additionally, we provide a Snakemake workflow to facilitate the benchmarking and to support the extension of new methods and new datasets. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13059-019-1795-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-09-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6734286/ /pubmed/31500660 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-019-1795-z Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Abdelaal, Tamim Michielsen, Lieke Cats, Davy Hoogduin, Dylan Mei, Hailiang Reinders, Marcel J. T. Mahfouz, Ahmed A comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data |
title | A comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data |
title_full | A comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data |
title_fullStr | A comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data |
title_short | A comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data |
title_sort | comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell rna sequencing data |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6734286/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31500660 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-019-1795-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT abdelaaltamim acomparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT michielsenlieke acomparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT catsdavy acomparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT hoogduindylan acomparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT meihailiang acomparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT reindersmarceljt acomparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT mahfouzahmed acomparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT abdelaaltamim comparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT michielsenlieke comparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT catsdavy comparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT hoogduindylan comparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT meihailiang comparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT reindersmarceljt comparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata AT mahfouzahmed comparisonofautomaticcellidentificationmethodsforsinglecellrnasequencingdata |