Back

Incorporating extrinsic noise into mechanistic modelling of single-cell transcriptomics

Öcal, K.

2023-10-02 bioinformatics
10.1101/2023.09.30.560282 bioRxiv
Show abstract

A mechanistic understanding of single-cell transcriptomics data requires differentiating between intrinsic, extrinsic and technical noise, but an abundance of the latter often obscures underlying biological patterns. Accurately modelling such data in the presence of large cell-to-cell heterogeneity due to factors such as cell size and cell cycle stage is a challenging task. We propose a tractable, fully Bayesian framework for mechanistic modelling of single-cell RNA sequencing data in the presence of cellular heterogeneity. Applied to murine transcriptomics data, we show that cell-specific effects can significantly alter previously inferred dynamics of individual genes. Our implementation is statistically exact and readily extensible, and we demonstrate how it can be combined with Bayesian model selection to compare various models of gene expression and measurement noise.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 1%
21.9%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 1%
18.5%
Similar papers in this journal
3
BMC Bioinformatics
○ 457 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
7.9%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Genome Biology
○ 637 papers in training set
Top 3%
4.3%
Similar papers in this journal
50% of probability mass above
5
Biophysical Journal
○ 631 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.8%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 37%
2.7%
7
Physical Review E
● 112 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.6%
8
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
● 235 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
9
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 44%
1.9%
10
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 52%
1.7%
11
Nature Computational Science
○ 55 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
12
Journal of Computational Biology
○ 48 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.5%
13
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.5%
14
The Annals of Applied Statistics
● 19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.4%
15
GENETICS
◐ 483 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
16
Nature Methods
○ 385 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
17
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 37%
1.1%
18
PRX Life
● 42 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
19
Biostatistics
◐ 24 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
20
Bioinformatics Advances
◐ 203 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
21
Genome Research
● 468 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
22
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
23
Physical Review Letters
● 47 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
24
BMC Genomics
○ 406 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.8%
25
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
◐ 242 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
26
Statistics in Medicine
○ 40 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.6%
27
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%
28
Communications Biology
○ 993 papers in training set
Top 35%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.