Can I run DESeq2 with SMART-Seq data
1
0
Entering edit mode
Assa Yeroslaviz ★ 1.5k
@assa-yeroslaviz-1597
Last seen 24 days ago
Germany

my data set comes from single-cell SMART-Seq data, where I have in total 48 samples, 24 samples for the control and 24 for my KO. Each sample represent one cell.

I have used STAR to map the samples against my indexed genome and featureCounts to quantify the reads onto the genes.

If I do a pre-filtering before running the DESeq function only very little genes are left, as I'm not sure what a meaningful filter threshold would be.

keep <- rowSums(counts(dds) <= 100 ) == 12
table(keep)

keep
FALSE  TRUE 
56869   141 

I was wondering if this is a feasible way of analysing the data, as I have many 0 reads in the count matrix (which would have been expected from the single-cell data set.

(or would the kallisto -> tximport -> DESeq2 or Kallisto -> RSEM way would be better in this case?)

thanks for the advice

Assa

DESeq2 SMART-seq • 1.2k views
ADD COMMENT
1
Entering edit mode

The choice of preprocessing is on you. There are a variety of benchmark papers and preprints you can get guidance from.

Towards prefiltering, I personally think it's more meaningful gor single-cell data to filter for the percent of cells per condition/cluster/group expressing a gene rather than count cutoffs. For example, at least 10% of cells of st least one group should express (count>0) a gene so it's not a spurious detection. DESeq2 vignette has a single-cell section with recommendations for analysis.

In any case, if you have biological replicates you might consider pseudobulk analysis.

ADD REPLY
0
Entering edit mode

I haven't seen this part before. Thanks for pointing it out.

ADD REPLY
3
Entering edit mode
@mikelove
Last seen 4 days ago
United States

There should be no problem to run DESeq2.

You can leave the filtering to results() or, better, use IHW.

Your filter looks wrong, it has a less than, just leave out filtering for now.

ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode

thanks, the filter is the other way around, true 🙈

ADD REPLY

Login before adding your answer.

Traffic: 487 users visited in the last hour
Help About
FAQ
Access RSS
API
Stats

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

Powered by the version 2.3.6