You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
For LMS samples in GSE212527, a public soft tissue sarcoma single dataset, I filtered the seurat object out with nFeature in 200-9000. And then delete the doublets, assuming 7.5% doublet formation rate. After clustered by FindClusters function, I found some clusters (c0, c3) has obvious lower Counts number than others (and also has fewer and inapparent positive markers). Does this clusters indicate poor sequencing? Maybe we should delete this clusters before futher analysis, since it is very hard to annotate them.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
-
For LMS samples in GSE212527, a public soft tissue sarcoma single dataset, I filtered the seurat object out with nFeature in 200-9000. And then delete the doublets, assuming 7.5% doublet formation rate. After clustered by FindClusters function, I found some clusters (c0, c3) has obvious lower Counts number than others (and also has fewer and inapparent positive markers). Does this clusters indicate poor sequencing? Maybe we should delete this clusters before futher analysis, since it is very hard to annotate them.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions