title: Low-cost, low-input RNA-seq protocols perform nearly as well as high-input protocols.
abstract: Recently, a number of protocols extending RNA-sequencing to the single-cell regime have been published. However, we were concerned that the additional steps to deal with such minute quantities of input sample would introduce serious biases that would make analysis of the data using existing approaches invalid. In this study, we performed a critical evaluation of several of these low-volume RNA-seq protocols, and found that they performed slightly less well in per-gene linearity of response, but with at least two orders of magnitude less sample required. We also explored a simple modification to one of these protocols that, for many samples, reduced the cost of library preparation to approximately $20/sample.
authors.affiliation: Graduate Program in Biophysics, University of California , Berkeley, CA , USA.
authors.forename: Peter A
authors.initials: PA
authors.lastname: Combs
authors.affiliation: Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California , Berkeley, CA , USA ; Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California , Berkeley, CA , USA.
authors.forename: Michael B
authors.initials: MB
authors.lastname: Eisen
keywords: Linear output; Protocols; RNAseq; Single cell
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2015 Jan 15;31(2):166-9
references.pmid: 25260700
references.citation: Nucleic Acids Res. 2012 Jan;40(Database issue):D706-14
references.pmid: 22127867
references.citation: Sci Rep. 2014 Jan 14;4:3678
references.pmid: 24419370
references.citation: Genome Biol. 2002 Jul 24;3(8):RESEARCH0038
references.pmid: 12186645
references.citation: Cell Rep. 2012 Sep 27;2(3):666-73
references.pmid: 22939981
references.citation: Cell. 2012 Sep 28;151(1):56-67
references.pmid: 23021215
references.citation: Annu Rev Entomol. 2000;45:203-31
references.pmid: 10761576
references.citation: Genome Res. 2011 Sep;21(9):1543-51
references.pmid: 21816910
references.citation: PLoS One. 2013 Aug 12;8(8):e71820
references.pmid: 23951250
references.citation: Nat Methods. 2008 Jul;5(7):621-8
references.pmid: 18516045
references.citation: Cell. 2007 Jul 13;130(1):153-64
references.pmid: 17632062
references.citation: Genome Res. 2011 Jul;21(7):1160-7
references.pmid: 21543516
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2013 Jan 1;29(1):15-21
references.pmid: 23104886
references.citation: Genome Biol. 2013 Apr 17;14(4):R31
references.pmid: 23594475
references.citation: Nat Biotechnol. 2012 Aug;30(8):777-82
references.pmid: 22820318
references.citation: PLoS Biol. 2011 Feb 08;9(2):e1000590
references.pmid: 21346796
references.citation: Science. 2002 Aug 16;297(5584):1183-6
references.pmid: 12183631
references.citation: Dev Biol. 2013 Sep 1;381(1):286-99
references.pmid: 23800450
references.citation: Nat Methods. 2013 Nov;10(11):1096-8
references.pmid: 24056875
references.citation: Nat Methods. 2009 May;6(5):377-82
references.pmid: 19349980
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Dec 20;102(51):18403-7
references.pmid: 16352710
references.citation: Nature. 2014 May 15;509(7500):371-5
references.pmid: 24739965
references.citation: Nat Methods. 2010 Sep;7(9):709-15
references.pmid: 20711195
references.citation: Nat Methods. 2014 Jan;11(1):41-6
references.pmid: 24141493
references.citation: Genome Res. 2014 Mar;24(3):496-510
references.pmid: 24299736
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2009 Jun 1;25(11):1422-3
references.pmid: 19304878
references.citation: Nat Protoc. 2014 Jan;9(1):171-81
references.pmid: 24385147
references.citation: PLoS Comput Biol. 2010 Sep 16;6(9):null
references.pmid: 20862354
references.citation: Elife. 2013 Aug 06;2:e00522
references.pmid: 23930223
references.citation: Cell. 2012 Sep 14;150(6):1209-22
references.pmid: 22980981