Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Simon Anders
    replied
    Could you please try again with

    Code:
    cds <- estimateDispersions( cds, method="pooled" )
    It seems that our improved method removes these oddities reliably only if one uses a pooled dispersion estimation. I guess, we should hence change the default in 'estimateDispersions' to this, but at the moment, it is still method="per-condition" (which is the same as method="normal" in the old version).

    Leave a comment:


  • Gangcai
    replied
    Hi Simon,
    I have tried the deve version of DESeq. The number of significant genes drop quite a lot. It does look better comparing with previous result. But still have some genes have high variation within biological repilcates.
    wt1 wt2 treat1 treat2 pvalue_adjusted
    928 0 0 0 <<0.01
    0 135 0 0 <<0.01

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Anders
    replied
    At http://www.bioconductor.org/packages...l/Biobase.html

    However, installing a 'devel' version of Biobase over a 're'ease' installtion of Bioconductor might cause chaos. Better install the devel version of R and then, 'bioclite' will pull 'devel' versions of all Bioc packages.

    Leave a comment:


  • labunit
    replied
    Originally posted by Gangcai View Post
    Hi Simon,
    Thanks for your quick reply. One more question about installation of the devel DESeq.
    I have downloaded the newest version of Biobase from bioconductor, but DESeq require even advanced version.(http://www.bioconductor.org/packages...l/Biobase.html )
    Do you know where to download >=2.13.6 Biobase? Thanks.
    "
    Error : package 'Biobase' 2.12.2 was found, but >= 2.13.6 is required by 'DESeq'
    "
    You need to download the development version of R (2.14) to be able to install the development branch of Bioconductor packages including DESeq 1.5.19

    Leave a comment:


  • Gangcai
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Anders View Post
    Short answer: Please try again with the 'deve' version of DESeq (version 1.5.19), and this oddity should vanish.

    Long answer: In the current release version of DESeq (version 1.4.1), we estimate a variance for each gene, fit a line through the mean-variance plot, and then use the fitted value of the variance, i.e., the value typical for a gene of the same expression strength. The 'nbinomTest' function gives you, besides the p values, two columns with the "variance residuals", i.e., the ratio of the gene's variance estimate over the fitted value. Cases such as your should show up as having a large value there and the vignette advises to disregard such hits in the downstream analysis.

    Nobody ever read this sentence in the vignette, and also, the solution was rather unsatisfactory anyway, and so we have now changed this. Now, we do not use anymore always the fitted value, but instead the maximum of the per-gene estimate and the fitted value. This avoids artifacts like the ones you see. Have a look at the help page for 'estimateDispersion' in the new version, and also at the vignette, which we have extensively overhauled.
    Hi Simon,
    Thanks for your quick reply. One more question about installation of the devel DESeq.
    I have downloaded the newest version of Biobase from bioconductor, but DESeq require even advanced version.(http://www.bioconductor.org/packages...l/Biobase.html )
    Do you know where to download >=2.13.6 Biobase? Thanks.
    "
    Error : package 'Biobase' 2.12.2 was found, but >= 2.13.6 is required by 'DESeq'
    "

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Anders
    replied
    Short answer: Please try again with the 'deve' version of DESeq (version 1.5.19), and this oddity should vanish.

    Long answer: In the current release version of DESeq (version 1.4.1), we estimate a variance for each gene, fit a line through the mean-variance plot, and then use the fitted value of the variance, i.e., the value typical for a gene of the same expression strength. The 'nbinomTest' function gives you, besides the p values, two columns with the "variance residuals", i.e., the ratio of the gene's variance estimate over the fitted value. Cases such as your should show up as having a large value there and the vignette advises to disregard such hits in the downstream analysis.

    Nobody ever read this sentence in the vignette, and also, the solution was rather unsatisfactory anyway, and so we have now changed this. Now, we do not use anymore always the fitted value, but instead the maximum of the per-gene estimate and the fitted value. This avoids artifacts like the ones you see. Have a look at the help page for 'estimateDispersion' in the new version, and also at the vignette, which we have extensively overhauled.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gangcai
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Anders View Post
    I'm not sure I understand your question. Could you give an example, please?
    Dear Simon,
    I have quite similar problem for the significant genes detected by DESeq and edgeR. Both of them output some significant candidates which have quite large variation within groups. Such as:
    wt1: 2
    wt2: 345
    treat1: 3
    treat2:1

    or
    wt1: 0
    wt2: 345
    treat1: 0
    treat2: 0

    Is it normal to get low p value for such kind of expression pattern? Thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • katussa10
    replied
    Hi Simon,
    Here is an example (attached txt file) for the genes that showed differential expression, but between the same experimental group variation was very high. Please let me if it is still not clear. I will try to explain again.
    Attached Files
    Last edited by katussa10; 06-14-2011, 11:42 AM. Reason: Attachment was not correct

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Anders
    replied
    I'm not sure I understand your question. Could you give an example, please?

    Leave a comment:


  • katussa10
    started a topic RNAseq analysis using DESeq

    RNAseq analysis using DESeq

    We are using DESeq to find differentially expressed genes for RNAseq experiment with two biological replicates. When we did the analyses considering them as biological replicates, we found that among differential expressed genes, there was a very high number of counts in one biorep compared to the others. Then we took biorep1 from experimental group and compared with biorep1 of the control group and there were only 3 genes differentially expressed at padj 0.05. However, there are lot of genes with thousands reads vs 0 in the two groups. Then we did the same with the second biorep and we found about 100 differentially expressed genes. Does anyone know why this is happening?

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • SEQadmin2
    Advanced Sequencing Platforms Tackle Neuroscience’s Toughest Genomics Problems
    by SEQadmin2



    Genomics studies in neuroscience face a special challenge due to the brain’s complexity and scarcity of samples. Mapping changes in cell type and state using conventional next-generation sequencing methods remains challenging. Advances in technologies like single-cell sequencing, spatial transcriptomics, and long-read sequencing have opened the door to deeper studies of the brain and diseases like Alzheimer’s, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and schizophrenia.
    ...
    07-09-2026, 11:10 AM
  • SEQadmin2
    Cancer Drug Resistance: The Lingering Barrier to Rising Survival
    by SEQadmin2



    Cancer survival rates have significantly increased in the last few decades in the United States, reaching a combined 70% 5-year survival rate by 2021. Behind this number, there are years of research to find new therapies, drug targets, and early detection methods. But there is one core challenge that keeps slowing down these advances, and it’s about drug resistance.

    There is no single reason why many patients don’t respond to treatment as expected. Cancer is...
    07-08-2026, 05:17 AM
  • 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

ad_right_rmr

Collapse

News

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by SEQadmin2, 07-13-2026, 10:26 AM
0 responses
27 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 07-09-2026, 10:04 AM
0 responses
37 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 07-08-2026, 10:08 AM
0 responses
24 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 07-07-2026, 11:05 AM
0 responses
34 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Working...