(Peer-Reviewed) Comparative analysis of NovaSeq 6000 and MGISEQ 2000 single-cell RNA sequencing data
Weiran Chen ¹, Md Wahiduzzaman ¹, Quan Li ¹ , Yixue Li 李亦学 ¹ ², Guangyong Zheng 郑广勇 ¹, Tao Huang 黄涛 ¹
¹ Bio-Med Big Data Center, Key Laboratory of Computational Biology, Shanghai Institute of Nutrition and Health, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200031, China
中国 上海 中国科学院上海营养与健康研究所 计算生物学重点实验室 生物医学大数据中心
² School of Life Science, Hangzhou Institute for Advanced Study, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, China
中国 杭州 中国科学院大学 杭州高等研究院 生命与健康科学学院
Abstract
Background
Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) technology is now becoming a widely applied method of transcriptome exploration that helps to reveal cell-type composition as well as cell-state heterogeneity for specific biological processes. Distinct sequencing platforms and processing pipelines may contribute to various results even for the same sequencing samples. Therefore, benchmarking sequencing platforms and processing pipelines was considered as a necessary step to interpret scRNA-seq data. However, recent comparing efforts were constrained in sequencing platforms or analyzing pipelines. There is still a lack of knowledge of analyzing pipelines matched with specific sequencing platforms in aspects of sensitivity, precision, and so on.
Methods
We downloaded public scRNA-seq data that was generated by two distinct sequencers, NovaSeq 6000 and MGISEQ 2000. Then data was processed through the Drop-seq-tools, UMI-tools and Cell Ranger pipeline respectively. We calculated multiple measurements based on the expression profiles of the six platform-pipeline combinations.
Results
We found that all three pipelines had comparable performance, the Cell Ranger pipeline achieved the best performance in precision while UMI-tools prevailed in terms of sensitivity and marker calling.
Conclusions
Our work provided an insight into the selection of scRNA-seq data processing tools for two sequencing platforms as well as a framework to evaluate platform-pipeline combinations.
Ultrafast all-optical modulation of wide-bandwidth pulses enabled by silicon-metasurfaces
Kaloyan Georgiev, Khosro Zangeneh Kamali, Anton A. Trifonov, Giulia Crotti, Lyuben Petrov, Stefan Georgiev, Hristo Iliev, Lei Xu, Unai Arregui Leon, Mohsen Rahmani, Giuseppe Della Valle, Ivan Buchvarov, Dragomir Neshev
Opto-Electronic Advances
2026-09-15
Physics-informed neural fields enable blind aberration correction for partially coherent quantitative phase imaging
Shun Zhou, Xingyu Huang, Linpeng Lu, Habib Ullah, Kaiyu Du, Maciej Trusiak, Malgorzata Kujawinska, Yuzhen Zhang, Yao Fan, Qian Chen, Qinrong Zhang, Chao Zuo
Opto-Electronic Science
2026-08-26
Heterogeneously integrated micro-ring with SnS₂ for dual-functional optical modulation and photodetection
Jinyi Du, Lidan Lu, Xu Zhang, Bofei Zhu, Wenbo Bo, Yingjie Xu, Guang Chen, Yanlin He, Guanghui Ren, Xiaoping Lou, Zheng You, Lianqing Zhu
Opto-Electronic Advances
2026-08-25
Hardware-aware lightweight photonic spiking neural network for pattern classification
Shuiying Xiang, Yahui Zhang, Shangxuan Shi, Haowen Zhao, Dianzhuang Zheng, Xingxing Guo, Yanan Han, Ye Tian, Liyue Zhang, Yuechun Shi, Yue Hao
Opto-Electronic Advances
2026-08-25
PhyspeNet: An empirical physics-aware network for adaptive speckle reconstructive spectrometry
Junrui Liang, Min Jiang, Jun Li, Zhongming Huang, Junhong He, Yanting Guo, Yanzhao Ke, Jun Ye, Jiangming Xu, Jinyong Leng, Pu Zhou
Opto-Electronic Advances
2026-08-25
A 36 × 240 Gbps hybrid mode/wavelength division multiplexing transmitter using lithium niobate on insulator
Mingyu Zhu, Weihan Wang, Ruitao Ma, Aoyun Gao, Chun Gao, Zexu Wang, Fei Huang, Zhenyuan Bao, Dajian Liu, Jiaxuan Gan, Zejie Yu, Huan Li, Weike Zhao, Daoxin Dai
Opto-Electronic Advances
2026-08-25