<i>MALAT1</i> expression indicates cell quality in single-cell RNA sequencing data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) has revolutionized our understanding of cell types and tissues. However, empty droplets and poor quality cells are often captured in single cell genomics experiments and need to be removed to avoid cell type interpretation errors. Many automated and manual methods exist to identify poor quality cells or empty droplets, such as minimum RNA count thresholds and comparing the gene expression profile of an individual cell to the overall background RNA expression of the experiment. A versatile approach is to use unbalanced overall RNA splice ratios of cells to identify poor quality cells or empty droplets. However, this approach is computationally intensive, requiring a detailed search through all sequence reads in the experiment to quantify spliced and unspliced reads. We found that the expression level of MALAT1, a non-coding RNA retained in the nucleus and ubiquitously expressed across cell types, is strongly correlated with this splice ratio measure and thus can be used to similarly identify low quality cells in scRNA-seq data. Since it is easy to visualize the expression of a single gene in single-cell maps, MALAT1 expression is a simple cell quality measure that can be quickly used during the cell annotation process to improve the interpretation of cells in tissues of human, mouse and other species with a conserved MALAT1 function.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".