bioRxiv Science⌕ Search

Biology subjects

Rich, J. M.

Publications and source records attributed to Rich, J. M..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Reference-based variant detection with varseek

Variant detection from sequencing data is fundamental for genomics and is the first step in a wide range of applications, ranging from genome-wide association studies to disease diagnosis. Widely used tools for variant detection utilize a de novo approach that is based on a combination of read mapping algorithms and statistical methods for identifying genetic variation from error-prone sequencing data. This approach has been successful, although the detection of insertion and deletion variants, as well as the detection of variants from low-coverage data, remain challenging problems. We introduce varseek, a reference-based approach to variant detection that provides large improvements in performance in these challenging cases. The varseek approach utilizes a k-mer pseudoalignment approach, which provides the ability to identify variants at single-cell resolution in single-cell transcriptomics data. We showcase the versatility and performance of varseek for detecting tumor-specific COSMIC variants in glioblastoma single-cell sequencing.

bioinformatics↗

The impact of package selection and versioning on single-cell RNA-seq analysis

Standard single-cell RNA-sequencing analysis (scRNA-seq) workflows consist of converting raw read data into cell-gene count matrices through sequence alignment, followed by analyses including filtering, highly variable gene selection, dimensionality reduction, clustering, and differential expression analysis. Seurat and Scanpy are the most widely-used packages implementing such workflows, and are generally thought to implement individual steps similarly. We investigate in detail the algorithms and methods underlying Seurat and Scanpy and find that there are, in fact, considerable differences in the outputs of Seurat and Scanpy. The extent of differences between the programs is approximately equivalent to the variability that would be introduced in benchmarking scRNA-seq datasets by sequencing less than 5% of the reads or analyzing less than 20% of the cell population. Additionally, distinct versions of Seurat and Scanpy can produce very different results, especially during parts of differential expression analysis. Our analysis highlights the need for users of scRNA-seq to carefully assess the tools on which they rely, and the importance of developers of scientific software to prioritize transparency, consistency, and reproducibility for their tools.

bioinformatics↗