↓ Skip to main content

Distribution Analyzer, a methodology for identifying and clustering outlier conditions from single-cell distributions, and its application to a Nanog reporter RNAi screen

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Distribution Analyzer, a methodology for identifying and clustering outlier conditions from single-cell distributions, and its application to a Nanog reporter RNAi screen
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12859-015-0636-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julian A. Gingold, Ed S. Coakley, Jie Su, Dung-Fang Lee, Zerlina Lau, Hongwei Zhou, Dan P. Felsenfeld, Christoph Schaniel, Ihor R. Lemischka

Abstract

Chemical or small interfering (si) RNA screens measure the effects of many independent experimental conditions, each applied to a population of cells (e.g., all of the cells in a well). High-content screens permit a readout (e.g., fluorescence, luminescence, cell morphology) from each cell in the population. Most analysis approaches compare the average effect on each population, precluding identification of outliers that affect the distribution of the reporter in the population but not its average. Other approaches only measure changes to the distribution with a single parameter, precluding accurate distinction and clustering of interesting outlier distributions. We describe a methodology to identify outlier conditions by considering the cell-level measurements from each condition as a sample of an underlying distribution. With appropriate selection of a distance metric, all effects can be embedded in a fixed-dimensionality Euclidean basis, facilitating identification and clustering of biologically interesting outliers. We demonstrate that measurement of distances with the Hellinger distance metric offers substantial computational efficiencies over alternative metrics. We validate this methodology using an RNA interference (RNAi) screen in mouse embryonic stem cells (ESC) with a Nanog reporter. The methodology clusters effects of multiple control siRNAs into their true identities better than conventional approaches describing the median cell fluorescence or the commonly used Kolmogorov-Smirnov distance between the observed fluorescence distribution and the null distribution. It identifies outlier genes with effects on the reporter distribution that would have been missed by other methods. Among them, siRNA targeting Chek1 leads to a wider Nanog reporter fluorescence distribution. Similarly, siRNA targeting Med14 or Med27 leads to a narrower Nanog reporter fluorescence distribution. We confirm the roles of these three genes in regulating pluripotency by mRNA expression and alkaline phosphatase staining using independent short hairpin (sh) RNAs. Using our methodology, we describe each experimental condition by a probability distribution. Measuring distances between probability distributions permits a multivariate rather than univariate readout. Clustering points derived from these distances allows us to obtain greater biological insight than methods based solely on single parameters. We find several outliers from a mouse ESC RNAi screen that we confirm to be pluripotency regulators. Many of these outliers would have been missed by other analysis methods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 1 4%
Unknown 22 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 22%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 13%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 17%
Engineering 2 9%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Chemical Engineering 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 5 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2016.
All research outputs
#13,441,810
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,194
of 7,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,853
of 263,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#65
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.