ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2026
Harvesting more reads from single-cell combinatorial barcoding data with scarecrow.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2026. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
summaryCombinatorial barcoding technologies for single-cell nucleotide sequencing, such as split-pool ligation protocols, involve sequential rounds of cell barcoding to uniquely tag individual cells. The rapid adoption of combinatorial barcoding in recent years is due in part to its scalability across cells and samples. However, small shifts in barcode positions within sequencing reads caused by technical artifacts, e.g. during barcode incorporation or synthesis, can impact the accurate assignment of reads to cell barcodes. Existing processing tools typically assume barcodes contain fixed-length nucleotide sequences located at fixed positions within reads, overlooking any positional variability. Consequently, reads containing truncated or mispositioned barcodes are discarded during initial data processing steps leading to significant data loss. To solve this limitation and maximize the retention of sequencing reads from single-cell combinatorial barcoding experiments, we introduce scarecrow. This tool screens a subsample of reads to generate position-specific barcode profiles, which are then used to flexibly identify barcode sequences in each read whilst accounting for positional errors, a phenomenon we refer to as "jitter". Barcode matches are then prioritized to minimize nucleotide mismatches and the degree of jitter. These initial profiles are subsequently used to extract and error correct barcode combinations in high throughput sequencing libraries. By incorporating jitter into barcode error correction, scarecrow enables greater data recovery and improved downstream single-cell analyses. Scarecrow is fully open access, implemented in Python, and generates output files using standardized sequence file formats for maximal interoperability. A detailed explanation of the scarecrow workflow can be found in the supplementary materials. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Scarecrow is freely available on GitHub https://github.com/MorganResearchLab/scarecrow and Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18621784.
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.