Author
Listed:
- Yu Hu
- Kai Wang
- Mingyao Li
Abstract
The emergence of single-cell RNA-seq (scRNA-seq) technology has made it possible to measure gene expression variations at cellular level. This breakthrough enables the investigation of a wider range of problems including analysis of splicing heterogeneity among individual cells. However, compared to bulk RNA-seq, scRNA-seq data are much noisier due to high technical variability and low sequencing depth. Here we propose SCATS (Single-Cell Analysis of Transcript Splicing) for differential splicing analysis in scRNA-seq, which achieves high sensitivity at low coverage by accounting for technical noise. SCATS models scRNA-seq data either with or without Unique Molecular Identifiers (UMIs). For non-UMI data, SCATS explicitly models technical noise by accounting for capture efficiency and amplification bias through the use of external spike-ins; for UMI data, SCATS models capture efficiency and further accounts for transcriptional burstiness. A key aspect of SCATS lies in its ability to group “exons” that originate from the same isoform(s). Grouping exons is essential in splicing analysis of scRNA-seq data as it naturally aggregates spliced reads across different exons, making it possible to detect splicing events even when sequencing depth is low. To evaluate the performance of SCATS, we analyzed both simulated and real scRNA-seq datasets and compared with existing methods including Census and DEXSeq. We show that SCATS has well controlled type I error rate, and is more powerful than existing methods, especially when splicing difference is small. In contrast, Census suffers from severe type I error inflation, whereas DEXSeq is more conservative. When applied to mouse brain scRNA-seq datasets, SCATS identified more differential splicing events with subtle difference across cell types compared to Census and DEXSeq. With the increasing adoption of scRNA-seq, we believe SCATS will be well-suited for various splicing studies. The implementation of SCATS can be downloaded from https://github.com/huyustats/SCATS.Author summary: Alternative splicing is a major mechanism for generating transcriptome diversity. However, few published scRNA-seq studies have investigated alternative splicing, and even when studied, methods developed for bulk RNA-seq were utilized. Compared to bulk RNA-seq, scRNA-seq data are much noisier due to high technical variability and low sequencing depth. Methods developed for bulk RNA-seq may not be optimal when analyzing data generated from scRNA-seq experiments. To fill in this gap, we developed SCATS, an open-source software package, which allows analysis of scRNA-seq data with or without Unique Molecular Identifiers (UMIs). SCATS is able to detect splicing events even when sequencing depth is low. When applied to mouse brain scRNA-seq datasets, SCATS identified more differential splicing events with subtle differences across cortical cell types than Census and DEXSeq. Additionally, SCATS accurately characterized splicing heterogeneity across cortical cell types, which was further confirmed by qRT-PCR measurements. Our study highlights the benefit of SCATS for elucidating splicing heterogeneity across cells in scRNA-seq data.
Suggested Citation
Yu Hu & Kai Wang & Mingyao Li, 2020.
"Detecting differential alternative splicing events in scRNA-seq with or without Unique Molecular Identifiers,"
PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-19, June.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007925
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007925
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007925. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.