Direct Comparative Analyses of 10X Genomics Chromium and Smart-seq2

Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) is generally used for profiling transcriptome of individual cells. The droplet-based 10X Genomics Chromium (10X) approach and the plate-based Smart-seq2 full-length method are two frequently used scRNA-seq platforms, yet there are only a few thorough and system...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xiliang Wang, Yao He, Qiming Zhang, Xianwen Ren, Zemin Zhang
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
10X
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/95aff0e1a7e146288188f79a967fac53
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:95aff0e1a7e146288188f79a967fac53
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:95aff0e1a7e146288188f79a967fac532021-11-16T04:09:24ZDirect Comparative Analyses of 10X Genomics Chromium and Smart-seq21672-022910.1016/j.gpb.2020.02.005https://doaj.org/article/95aff0e1a7e146288188f79a967fac532021-04-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1672022921000486https://doaj.org/toc/1672-0229Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) is generally used for profiling transcriptome of individual cells. The droplet-based 10X Genomics Chromium (10X) approach and the plate-based Smart-seq2 full-length method are two frequently used scRNA-seq platforms, yet there are only a few thorough and systematic comparisons of their advantages and limitations. Here, by directly comparing the scRNA-seq data generated by these two platforms from the same samples of CD45− cells, we systematically evaluated their features using a wide spectrum of analyses. Smart-seq2 detected more genes in a cell, especially low abundance transcripts as well as alternatively spliced transcripts, but captured higher proportion of mitochondrial genes. The composite of Smart-seq2 data also resembled bulk RNA-seq data more. For 10X-based data, we observed higher noise for mRNAs with low expression levels. Approximately 10%−30% of all detected transcripts by both platforms were from non-coding genes, with long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) accounting for a higher proportion in 10X. 10X-based data displayed more severe dropout problem, especially for genes with lower expression levels. However, 10X-data can detect rare cell types given its ability to cover a large number of cells. In addition, each platform detected distinct groups of differentially expressed genes between cell clusters, indicating the different characteristics of these technologies. Our study promotes better understanding of these two platforms and offers the basis for an informed choice of these widely used technologies.Xiliang WangYao HeQiming ZhangXianwen RenZemin ZhangElsevierarticleSingle-cell RNA sequencing10XSmart-seq2Bulk RNA-seqComparisonBiology (General)QH301-705.5ENGenomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics, Vol 19, Iss 2, Pp 253-266 (2021)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Single-cell RNA sequencing
10X
Smart-seq2
Bulk RNA-seq
Comparison
Biology (General)
QH301-705.5
spellingShingle Single-cell RNA sequencing
10X
Smart-seq2
Bulk RNA-seq
Comparison
Biology (General)
QH301-705.5
Xiliang Wang
Yao He
Qiming Zhang
Xianwen Ren
Zemin Zhang
Direct Comparative Analyses of 10X Genomics Chromium and Smart-seq2
description Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) is generally used for profiling transcriptome of individual cells. The droplet-based 10X Genomics Chromium (10X) approach and the plate-based Smart-seq2 full-length method are two frequently used scRNA-seq platforms, yet there are only a few thorough and systematic comparisons of their advantages and limitations. Here, by directly comparing the scRNA-seq data generated by these two platforms from the same samples of CD45− cells, we systematically evaluated their features using a wide spectrum of analyses. Smart-seq2 detected more genes in a cell, especially low abundance transcripts as well as alternatively spliced transcripts, but captured higher proportion of mitochondrial genes. The composite of Smart-seq2 data also resembled bulk RNA-seq data more. For 10X-based data, we observed higher noise for mRNAs with low expression levels. Approximately 10%−30% of all detected transcripts by both platforms were from non-coding genes, with long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) accounting for a higher proportion in 10X. 10X-based data displayed more severe dropout problem, especially for genes with lower expression levels. However, 10X-data can detect rare cell types given its ability to cover a large number of cells. In addition, each platform detected distinct groups of differentially expressed genes between cell clusters, indicating the different characteristics of these technologies. Our study promotes better understanding of these two platforms and offers the basis for an informed choice of these widely used technologies.
format article
author Xiliang Wang
Yao He
Qiming Zhang
Xianwen Ren
Zemin Zhang
author_facet Xiliang Wang
Yao He
Qiming Zhang
Xianwen Ren
Zemin Zhang
author_sort Xiliang Wang
title Direct Comparative Analyses of 10X Genomics Chromium and Smart-seq2
title_short Direct Comparative Analyses of 10X Genomics Chromium and Smart-seq2
title_full Direct Comparative Analyses of 10X Genomics Chromium and Smart-seq2
title_fullStr Direct Comparative Analyses of 10X Genomics Chromium and Smart-seq2
title_full_unstemmed Direct Comparative Analyses of 10X Genomics Chromium and Smart-seq2
title_sort direct comparative analyses of 10x genomics chromium and smart-seq2
publisher Elsevier
publishDate 2021
url https://doaj.org/article/95aff0e1a7e146288188f79a967fac53
work_keys_str_mv AT xiliangwang directcomparativeanalysesof10xgenomicschromiumandsmartseq2
AT yaohe directcomparativeanalysesof10xgenomicschromiumandsmartseq2
AT qimingzhang directcomparativeanalysesof10xgenomicschromiumandsmartseq2
AT xianwenren directcomparativeanalysesof10xgenomicschromiumandsmartseq2
AT zeminzhang directcomparativeanalysesof10xgenomicschromiumandsmartseq2
_version_ 1718426740132413440