Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Deprecate BumpyMatrix functionality for molecule-based data #141

Open
lmweber opened this issue Sep 2, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Deprecate BumpyMatrix functionality for molecule-based data #141

lmweber opened this issue Sep 2, 2023 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@lmweber
Copy link
Collaborator

lmweber commented Sep 2, 2023

We previously included some functionality using BumpyMatrix to store molecule-based spatial transcriptomics data, along with an example dataset from the seqFISH platform in the STexampleData package.

This is now obsolete, since there are now two other great packages in Bioconductor (MoleculeExperiment and SpatialFeatureExperiment) contributed by other members of the Bioconductor community, which both extend SpatialExperiment to molecule-based data in a much more sophisticated / detailed manner than our BumpyMatrix example.

So I think it makes sense to deprecate and remove the BumpyMatrix functionality from the SpatialExperiment package. This will (i) avoid confusing users and (ii) reduce dependencies.

Any thoughts? I'll assign this to me for now.

@lmweber lmweber self-assigned this Sep 2, 2023
@drighelli
Copy link
Owner

Hi Lukas (@lmweber),

I'm glad you raised this point because I'm also interested in this aspect.

I saw the MoleculeExperiment and the SpatialFeatureExperiment packages, but still, I think it's too soon to deprecate our implementation in favour of other external packages.

More in detail, I'm not sure that those implementations are better from a computational point of view in handling molecule-based data. We don't have any benchmarking where the performances are compared yet.

At the moment, I'm working with multiple molecule-based data, focusing on some platforms and I'm trying to do some implementations starting from the actual implementation of SpatialExperiment, MoleculeExperiment and SpatialFeatureExperiment and I'd like to test their performances.

But until we don't have any comparison in terms of memory usage, computational elapsed time, etc., I would not deprecate any functionality in our or other "spatial" package.

It seems that we are at the beginning of the spreading of these technologies and I think so much more approaches will come out soon.

@lmweber
Copy link
Collaborator Author

lmweber commented Sep 11, 2023

Hi @drighelli , ok thanks, that sounds good!

If you are trying out and comparing some of these implementations with some real datasets then this will hopefully also help us get a better idea of how these implementations compare.

For now I believe it is mainly these three implementations available in Bioconductor for storing molecule-based data: SpatialExperiment, MoleculeExperiment, and SpatialFeatureExperiment. It will also be useful to keep a look out for any additional new packages that build on each of these.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants