Biology subjects

Putri, G.

Publications and source records attributed to Putri, G..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2025

Identifying the Minimal Number of Protein Markers for Cell Type Annotation Using MiniMarS

Over the past decade, there has been an explosion in the characterisation and discovery of cell populations using single-cell technologies. Single-cell multi-omics data, particularly those incorporating gene and protein expression, are increasingly commonplace and can lead to more refined characterisation of cell types. A common challenge for biologists is to isolate cells of interest using a minimal number of markers for cytometry experiments. Although several methods exist for marker selection, there is limited guidance on the relative performance of these methods, and a wrapper package that combines multiple methods is lacking. The method that performs best can vary depending on the dataset and it can be challenging for researchers to test multiple methods for a given dataset. To address these issues, we present MiniMarS (Minimal Marker Selection), an R package that serves as a wrapper for 10 different algorithms. It allows users to determine the best-performing algorithm for identifying the optimal number of markers that will delineate cell populations in their dataset. MiniMarS uses pre-annotated cells with protein features from CyTOF or sequencing-based assays such as CITE-seq and Abseq as input. Outputs include 1) the minimum number of protein markers required to identify the annotated cell populations using a range of marker selection algorithms, and 2) a range of metrics to evaluate the performance of each algorithm. MiniMarS effectively differentiated populations across various datasets, including those from human blood, bone marrow, thymus, mouse spleen, and lymph nodes, even after subsampling over 41,000 cells to 2,500 cells. MiniMarS also identified 15 markers from CITE-seq data, which were then used to successfully identify the same 11 cell subsets in a CyTOF dataset (F1 score>0.9). Additionally, we showed that by appropriately combining clusters, MiniMarS improves the F1 score of a rare population identification (<1% of total cells) by 28.7%. Together, these findings highlight the broad applicability of MiniMarS in identifying appropriate markers for distinguishing cell populations.

bioinformatics↗

bioRxiv2023

Library size confounds biology in spatial transcriptomics data

Spatial molecular technologies have revolutionised the study of disease microenvironments by providing spatial context to tissue heterogeneity. Recent spatial technologies are increasing the throughput and spatial resolution of measurements, resulting in larger datasets. The added spatial dimension and volume of measurements poses an analytics challenge that has, in the short-term, been addressed by adopting methods designed for the analysis of single-cell RNA-seq data. Though these methods work well in some cases, not all necessarily translate appropriately to spatial technologies. A common assumption is that total sequencing depth, also known as library size, represents technical variation in single-cell RNA-seq technologies, and this is often normalised out during analysis. Through analysis of several different spatial datasets, we noted that this assumption does not necessarily hold in spatial molecular data. To formally assess this, we explore the relationship between library size and independently annotated spatial regions, across 23 samples from 4 different spatial technologies with varying throughput and spatial resolution. We found that library size confounded biology across all technologies, regardless of the tissue being investigated. Statistical modelling of binned total transcripts shows that tissue region is strongly associated with library size across all technologies, even after accounting for cell density of the bins. Through a benchmarking experiment, we show that normalising out library size leads to sub-optimal spatial domain identification using common graph-based clustering algorithms. On average, better clustering was achieved when library size effects were not normalised out explicitly, especially with data from the newer sub-cellular localised technologies. Taking these results into consideration, we recommend that spatial data should not be specifically corrected for library size prior to analysis unless strongly motivated. We also emphasise that spatial data are different to single-cell RNA-seq and care should be taken when adopting algorithms designed for single cell data.

bioinformatics↗