Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • chouech
    Junior Member
    • Jul 2014
    • 2

    differential expression analysis for low coverage datasets

    Hi,

    I have RNAseq data with 1.5 M reads. But the general transcriptome coverge is very low. The percentage of gene covered over 70% at a given expression level is 20% only!

    So I was thinking that for differential expression analysis I'll get low power because I've got a lot of gene with low coverage that may be false positive...

    Do you think it could be a good idea to keep for differential analysis only gene with a moderate coverage like at least 50%??

    When I do this I can found more differentially expressed gene! (7 instead of 2)

    If someone has an opinion on this...
  • Brian Bushnell
    Super Moderator
    • Jan 2014
    • 2709

    #2
    1) It would be helpful to know what organism you're using.
    2) Regardless, 1.5M reads very low for a good DE experiment in anything larger than a bacteria (and low even for a bacteria). It would only be informative about a handful of genes. And your 'coverage' metric is less useful than knowing the total number of reads mapped to a gene.

    It sounds to me like you should generate a lot more data if you want useful results.

    Comment

    • chouech
      Junior Member
      • Jul 2014
      • 2

      #3
      It's a fungal genome: Magnaporthe (40 Mbp) but I can't sequence more data... so I was thinking to try to do with what I have analysing only genes that have enough mapped reads... the problem is to choose a threshold. That's why I was thinking to keep only gene that are 50% covered at least... but that's true that is some part of the gene that may represent only 1 read!

      Comment

      Latest Articles

      Collapse

      • GATTACAT
        Reply to Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
        by GATTACAT
        Love this - good data definitely starts from good input, and poor input can only give relatively poor data. I particularly like the mention of Nanodrop/absorbance based methods for quantification. It's such a toss up if you'll get an accurate reading or what amounts to a randomly generated number, and a lot of library/sequencing related issues can be traced back to poor quant.
        07-01-2026, 11:43 AM
      • SEQadmin2
        Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
        by SEQadmin2


        I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

        Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
        06-18-2026, 07:11 AM

      ad_right_rmr

      Collapse

      News

      Collapse

      Topics Statistics Last Post
      Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 11:08 AM
      0 responses
      6 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
      0 responses
      11 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
      0 responses
      19 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
      0 responses
      53 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Working...