Nature BiotechnologyGenomicsPeer-reviewed journal article
A Comprehensive Multi-Center Cross-platform Benchmarking Study of Single-cell RNA Sequencing Using Reference Samples
Wanqiu CheniD, Yongmei ZhaoiD, Xin CheniD, Zhaowei YangiD, Xiaojiang XuiD, Yingtao BiiD, Vicky CheniD, Jing LiiD, Hannah ChoiiD, Ben Ernest, Bao Quoc TraniD, Monika MehtaiD, Parimal KumariD, Andrew A. FarmeriD, Alain A. Mir, Urvashi Mehra, Jian‐Liang LiiD, Malcolm C. MoosiD, Wenming XiaoiD, Charles WangiD
Abstract
Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) has become a very powerful technology for biomedical research and is becoming much more affordable as methods continue to evolve, but it is unknown how reproducible different platforms are using different bioinformatics pipelines, particularly the recently developed scRNA-seq batch correction algorithms. We carried out a comprehensive multi-center cross-platform comparison on different scRNA-seq platforms using standard reference samples. We compared six pre-processing pipelines, seven bioinformatics normalization procedures, and seven batch effect correction methods including CCA, MNN, Scanorama, BBKNN, Harmony, limma and ComBat to evaluate the performance and reproducibility of 20 scRNA-seq data sets derived from four different platforms and centers. We benchmarked scRNA-seq performance across different platforms and testing sites using global gene expression profiles as well as some cell-type specific marker genes. We showed that there were large batch effects; and the reproducibility of scRNA-seq across platforms was dictated both by the expression level of genes selected and the batch correction methods used. We found that CCA, MNN, and BBKNN all corrected the batch variations fairly well for the scRNA-seq data derived from biologically similar samples across platforms/sites. However, for the scRNA-seq data derived from or consisting of biologically distinct samples, limma and ComBat failed to correct batch effects, whereas CCA over-corrected the batch effect and misclassified the cell types and samples. In contrast, MNN, Harmony and BBKNN separated biologically different samples/cell types into correspondingly distinct dimensional subspaces; however, consistent with this algorithms logic, MNN required that the samples evaluated each contain a shared portion of highly similar cells. In summary, we found a great cross-platform consistency in separating two distinct samples when an appropriate batch correction method was used. We hope this large cross-platform/site scRNA-seq data set will provide a valuable resource, and that our findings will offer useful advice for the single-cell sequencing community.
- Citations
- 114
- FWCI
- 4.95
- Field percentile
- top 3%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- A Multi-center Cross-platform Single-cell RNA Sequencing Reference Dataset
Xin Chen, Zhaowei Yang, … Charles Wang·Scientific DataPeer-reviewed·Feb 2, 2021
- Batch correction methods used in single cell RNA-sequencing analyses are often poorly calibrated
Sindri Emmanúel Antonsson, Páll Melsted·bioRxiv·Mar 19, 2024
- Correcting batch effects in single-cell RNA sequencing data by matching mutual nearest neighbours.
Laleh Haghverdi, Aaron T. L. Lun, … John C. Marioni·Nature BiotechnologyPeer-reviewed·Apr 2, 2018
- Flexible comparison of batch correction methods for single-cell RNA-seq using BatchBench
Ruben Chazarra-Gil, Stijn van Dongen, … Martin Hemberg·Nucleic Acids ResearchPeer-reviewed·Jan 13, 2021
- SMNN: Batch Effect Correction for Single-cell RNA-seq data via Supervised Mutual Nearest Neighbor Detection
Yuchen Yang, Gang Li, … Yun Li·Briefings in BioinformaticsPeer-reviewed·May 1, 2020
- Data Matrix Normalization and Merging Strategies Minimize Batch-specific Systemic Variation in scRNA-Seq Data
Benjamin R. Babcock, Astrid Kosters, … Eliver Ghosn·bioRxiv·Aug 18, 2021