ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Comparative analysis of nuclei isolation methods for brain single-nucleus RNA sequencing.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Single-nucleus RNA sequencing (snRNA-seq) enables resolving cellular heterogeneity in complex tissues. snRNA-seq overcomes limitations of traditional single-cell RNA-seq by using nuclei instead of cells, allowing to utilize frozen tissues and difficult-to-isolate cell types. Although various nuclei isolation methods have been developed, systematic evaluations of their effects on nuclear integrity and subsequent data quality remain lacking, a critical gap with profound implications for the rigor and reproducibility. To address this, we compared three mechanistically distinct nuclei isolation strategies with brain tissues: a sucrose gradient centrifugation-based method, a spin column-based method, and a machine-assisted platform. All methods successfully captured diverse cell types but revealed considerable protocol-dependent differences in cell type proportions, transcriptional homogeneity, and the preservation of cell-type-specific and cell-state-specific markers. Moreover, isolation workflows differentially influenced contamination levels from ambient, mitochondrial, and ribosomal RNAs. Our findings establish nuclei isolation methodology as a critical experimental variable shaping snRNA-seq data quality and biological interpretation. MOTIVATION: Single-nucleus RNA sequencing (snRNA-seq) has become an essential tool for transcriptomic analysis of complex tissues. However, the quality and efficiency of data generation depend heavily on the method used for nuclear isolation. The existing isolation techniques vary in their ability to preserve nuclear integrity, minimize ambient RNA contamination, and optimize recovery rates. Despite these differences in quality, a systematic comparison of these methods, specifically for brain tissue, is lacking. This gap poses a challenge for researchers in choosing the most suitable approach for their particular experimental requirements. To address this critical issue, our study directly compared three nuclei isolation methods and evaluated their performance in terms of yield, purity, and downstream sequencing quality. By providing a comprehensive assessment, we aim to guide researchers in selecting the most appropriate isolation protocol for their snRNA-seq experiments, ensuring optimal results and advancing the study of complex brain tissues at the single-nucleus level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.