Cargando…
Comparative analysis of antibody- and lipid-based multiplexing methods for single-cell RNA-seq
BACKGROUND: Multiplexing of samples in single-cell RNA-seq studies allows a significant reduction of the experimental costs, straightforward identification of doublets, increased cell throughput, and reduction of sample-specific batch effects. Recently published multiplexing techniques using oligo-c...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8851857/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35172874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-022-02628-8 |
_version_ | 1784652912847224832 |
---|---|
author | Mylka, Viacheslav Matetovici, Irina Poovathingal, Suresh Aerts, Jeroen Vandamme, Niels Seurinck, Ruth Verstaen, Kevin Hulselmans, Gert Van den Hoecke, Silvie Scheyltjens, Isabelle Movahedi, Kiavash Wils, Hans Reumers, Joke Van Houdt, Jeroen Aerts, Stein Saeys, Yvan |
author_facet | Mylka, Viacheslav Matetovici, Irina Poovathingal, Suresh Aerts, Jeroen Vandamme, Niels Seurinck, Ruth Verstaen, Kevin Hulselmans, Gert Van den Hoecke, Silvie Scheyltjens, Isabelle Movahedi, Kiavash Wils, Hans Reumers, Joke Van Houdt, Jeroen Aerts, Stein Saeys, Yvan |
author_sort | Mylka, Viacheslav |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Multiplexing of samples in single-cell RNA-seq studies allows a significant reduction of the experimental costs, straightforward identification of doublets, increased cell throughput, and reduction of sample-specific batch effects. Recently published multiplexing techniques using oligo-conjugated antibodies or -lipids allow barcoding sample-specific cells, a process called “hashing.” RESULTS: Here, we compare the hashing performance of TotalSeq-A and -C antibodies, custom synthesized lipids and MULTI-seq lipid hashes in four cell lines, both for single-cell RNA-seq and single-nucleus RNA-seq. We also compare TotalSeq-B antibodies with CellPlex reagents (10x Genomics) on human PBMCs and TotalSeq-B with different lipids on primary mouse tissues. Hashing efficiency was evaluated using the intrinsic genetic variation of the cell lines and mouse strains. Antibody hashing was further evaluated on clinical samples using PBMCs from healthy and SARS-CoV-2 infected patients, where we demonstrate a more affordable approach for large single-cell sequencing clinical studies, while simultaneously reducing batch effects. CONCLUSIONS: Benchmarking of different hashing strategies and computational pipelines indicates that correct demultiplexing can be achieved with both lipid- and antibody-hashed human cells and nuclei, with MULTISeqDemux as the preferred demultiplexing function and antibody-based hashing as the most efficient protocol on cells. On nuclei datasets, lipid hashing delivers the best results. Lipid hashing also outperforms antibodies on cells isolated from mouse brain. However, antibodies demonstrate better results on tissues like spleen or lung. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13059-022-02628-8. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8851857 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88518572022-02-18 Comparative analysis of antibody- and lipid-based multiplexing methods for single-cell RNA-seq Mylka, Viacheslav Matetovici, Irina Poovathingal, Suresh Aerts, Jeroen Vandamme, Niels Seurinck, Ruth Verstaen, Kevin Hulselmans, Gert Van den Hoecke, Silvie Scheyltjens, Isabelle Movahedi, Kiavash Wils, Hans Reumers, Joke Van Houdt, Jeroen Aerts, Stein Saeys, Yvan Genome Biol Research BACKGROUND: Multiplexing of samples in single-cell RNA-seq studies allows a significant reduction of the experimental costs, straightforward identification of doublets, increased cell throughput, and reduction of sample-specific batch effects. Recently published multiplexing techniques using oligo-conjugated antibodies or -lipids allow barcoding sample-specific cells, a process called “hashing.” RESULTS: Here, we compare the hashing performance of TotalSeq-A and -C antibodies, custom synthesized lipids and MULTI-seq lipid hashes in four cell lines, both for single-cell RNA-seq and single-nucleus RNA-seq. We also compare TotalSeq-B antibodies with CellPlex reagents (10x Genomics) on human PBMCs and TotalSeq-B with different lipids on primary mouse tissues. Hashing efficiency was evaluated using the intrinsic genetic variation of the cell lines and mouse strains. Antibody hashing was further evaluated on clinical samples using PBMCs from healthy and SARS-CoV-2 infected patients, where we demonstrate a more affordable approach for large single-cell sequencing clinical studies, while simultaneously reducing batch effects. CONCLUSIONS: Benchmarking of different hashing strategies and computational pipelines indicates that correct demultiplexing can be achieved with both lipid- and antibody-hashed human cells and nuclei, with MULTISeqDemux as the preferred demultiplexing function and antibody-based hashing as the most efficient protocol on cells. On nuclei datasets, lipid hashing delivers the best results. Lipid hashing also outperforms antibodies on cells isolated from mouse brain. However, antibodies demonstrate better results on tissues like spleen or lung. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13059-022-02628-8. BioMed Central 2022-02-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8851857/ /pubmed/35172874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-022-02628-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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 Mylka, Viacheslav Matetovici, Irina Poovathingal, Suresh Aerts, Jeroen Vandamme, Niels Seurinck, Ruth Verstaen, Kevin Hulselmans, Gert Van den Hoecke, Silvie Scheyltjens, Isabelle Movahedi, Kiavash Wils, Hans Reumers, Joke Van Houdt, Jeroen Aerts, Stein Saeys, Yvan Comparative analysis of antibody- and lipid-based multiplexing methods for single-cell RNA-seq |
title | Comparative analysis of antibody- and lipid-based multiplexing methods for single-cell RNA-seq |
title_full | Comparative analysis of antibody- and lipid-based multiplexing methods for single-cell RNA-seq |
title_fullStr | Comparative analysis of antibody- and lipid-based multiplexing methods for single-cell RNA-seq |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative analysis of antibody- and lipid-based multiplexing methods for single-cell RNA-seq |
title_short | Comparative analysis of antibody- and lipid-based multiplexing methods for single-cell RNA-seq |
title_sort | comparative analysis of antibody- and lipid-based multiplexing methods for single-cell rna-seq |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8851857/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35172874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-022-02628-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mylkaviacheslav comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT matetoviciirina comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT poovathingalsuresh comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT aertsjeroen comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT vandammeniels comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT seurinckruth comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT verstaenkevin comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT hulselmansgert comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT vandenhoeckesilvie comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT scheyltjensisabelle comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT movahedikiavash comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT wilshans comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT reumersjoke comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT vanhoudtjeroen comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT aertsstein comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq AT saeysyvan comparativeanalysisofantibodyandlipidbasedmultiplexingmethodsforsinglecellrnaseq |