Hello all, please excuse this rather naïve question but why should I use an RNA-SEQ specific application (such as edgeR, DESeq, etc.) on counts rather than a simple t-test on FPKM or RPKM values? I've seen many papers comparing the performance of different RNA-SEQ specific applications but I don't recall seeing any compared to a simple t-test. I presume there would be a breakdown of reliability at extreme values but has anyone seen an actual analysis? Thanks.
-
-
Have a read through the original limma paper. This was for microarrays, but the point is the same. Also, make sure you create you FPKMs/RPKMs from normalized values rather than using the classical FPKM/RPKM formulas. That latter are well known to be unreliable (not to mention that you lose precision when you convert to FPKM/RPKM). -
For a comparison that includes the t-test, see the voom paper at
As expected, the t-test does very poorly compared to the best of the RNA-seq specific methods.Comment
-
NGS has revolutionized clinical microbiology by offering new ways to identify and surveil pathogens without prior knowledge of the target. One popular approach is 16S rRNA and ITS amplicon sequencing, which targets specific microbial markers. But studies are increasingly incorporating shotgun metagenomics, a technique that sequences all DNA from a sample without targeting specific microbial markers. This approach allows more detailed taxonomic classification, detection...Today, 06:46 AM -
Tumors contain complex mixtures of cell populations that evolve in response to treatment and host-specific factors. Tissue biopsies provide only static snapshots of a tumor’s state. But what if we could follow that evolution over time using a minimally invasive technique?
Liquid biopsies can detect tumor-derived material circulating in the bloodstream, providing a way to study treatment response, detect emerging resistance, and discover new biomarkers. Circulating...10-14-2026, 09:55 AM
Comment