Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Marianna85
    Member
    • Mar 2012
    • 32

    #31
    sorry

    Comment

    • Marianna85
      Member
      • Mar 2012
      • 32

      #32
      sorry again...i think it's not ok

      Comment

      • Marianna85
        Member
        • Mar 2012
        • 32

        #33

        Comment

        • Simon Anders
          Senior Member
          • Feb 2010
          • 995

          #34
          Wow, this is quite a mess. Huge amounts of points with 0 reads in one and more than 10,000 reads in the other library. What have you sequenced there? If this is ordinary RNA-Seq data, things went quite wrong.

          Comment

          • Marianna85
            Member
            • Mar 2012
            • 32

            #35
            this is a RNAseq experiment in mollusc eggs. Raw reads after orthologs clustering. Yes, there are some points with a huge different among the two libraries. Is this the reason why I obtained so different normalization factors?

            Comment

            • Marianna85
              Member
              • Mar 2012
              • 32

              #36
              But...the two samples correspond each to a different stage...Maybe the expression profile between the two conditions is huge...and in this case, which is the best solution in order to normalize the raw count?

              Comment

              • Simon Anders
                Senior Member
                • Feb 2010
                • 995

                #37
                No matter how you normalize, all genes will show huge differences. And you will have no way to figure out whether you might have seen as huge differences has you sequenced two eggs from the same developmental stage (this is well possible: maybe mollusc eggs differ a lot from each other, or maybe your wet-lab protocol is unstable). This is, of course, just another example while doing an experiment without at least duplicates is simply bad science and a waste of time and money (and by now, no decent journal will accept such studies any more, I hope), but I am repeating, what I already said often in previous threads.

                Sorry for the pessimism, but quite frankly, I doubt that it's worth putting much more effort into this analysis. What exactly had you hoped to find?

                Comment

                • Marianna85
                  Member
                  • Mar 2012
                  • 32

                  #38
                  Originally posted by Simon Anders View Post
                  No matter how you normalize, all genes will show huge differences. And you will have no way to figure out whether you might have seen as huge differences has you sequenced two eggs from the same developmental stage (this is well possible: maybe mollusc eggs differ a lot from each other, or maybe your wet-lab protocol is unstable). This is, of course, just another example while doing an experiment without at least duplicates is simply bad science and a waste of time and money (and by now, no decent journal will accept such studies any more, I hope), but I am repeating, what I already said often in previous threads.

                  Sorry for the pessimism, but quite frankly, I doubt that it's worth putting much more effort into this analysis. What exactly had you hoped to find?
                  The experiment is mainly a transcriptome characterization...this is the reason why we didn't plan any replicates.In order to study the whole transcriptome, in my opinion, a simple normalization intra-library is enough.
                  But I also hoped to find few genes differentially expressed, without a p-values and without statistical power, just to find transcripts (maybe 5-10) which show a huge difference between the two conditions. Just a first step to be validated, no more. To do this I need an inter-library normalization.
                  Considering the data, do you think that this objective is too ambitious?
                  Marianna

                  Comment

                  • puggie
                    Member
                    • Nov 2011
                    • 52

                    #39
                    I work on whole-transcriptome also. I believe there is a lot of alternatives for normalizing this kind of data. I have tried edgeR but it did not produce meaningfull normalization by human eyes. What I do instead is based on FPKM/RPKM counts e.g. via Cufflinks. E.g. select 5-10.000 genes that are expressed in all samples and then normalize by these. If samples are of different origin this approach may prove insufficient.

                    Comment

                    • Marianna85
                      Member
                      • Mar 2012
                      • 32

                      #40
                      Hi Puggie,
                      thanks for your reply.

                      Originally posted by puggie View Post
                      E.g. select 5-10.000 genes that are expressed in all samples and then normalize by these
                      what do you mean normalize by 5-10.000 gene, how? you mean RPKM normalization?

                      Originally posted by puggie View Post
                      If samples are of different origin this approach may prove insufficient.
                      the two samples I have come from the same tissue but different maturation stage. But several genes seem to be extremely DE (0 vs 100.000 reads!)

                      Anyway RPKM normalization makes sense only if you don't need to compare different samples.

                      Marianna

                      Comment

                      Latest Articles

                      Collapse

                      • SEQadmin2
                        From Collection to Sequencing: Why Sample Preparation and Preservation Define Sequencing Data
                        by SEQadmin2


                        Data variability is still an issue in sequencing technologies despite the advances in reproducibility and accuracy of these platforms. But the problem does not originate in the sequencing itself, but in the previous steps, before the sample reaches the sequencer.


                        The first step is collection, followed by preservation and sample preparation for analysis. Most scientists overlook those steps, but not being careful might just be skewing the experiment’s results.
                        ...
                        Yesterday, 10:05 AM
                      • SEQadmin2
                        Single-Cell Sequencing at an Inflection Point: Early Impacts of New Platforms and Emerging Trends
                        by SEQadmin2


                        With the launch of new single-cell sequencing platforms in 2026, the field stands at an exciting inflection point. This article surveys the most impactful advances in the field and discusses how they’re reshaping research in cancer, immunology, and beyond.


                        Introduction

                        Single-cell sequencing technologies have undergone remarkable advances over the past decade, transitioning from low-throughput experimental approaches to highly scalable platforms capable of...
                        05-22-2026, 06:42 AM
                      • SEQadmin2
                        Environmental Genomics in the Age of NGS: From Microbes to Conservation Strategies
                        by SEQadmin2

                        Studying ecosystems means dealing with complex, multi-species communities that are hard to observe at scale. This complexity, however, hides many important questions to be answered, from how biogeochemical cycles work and how climate change can affect species distribution to how conservation strategies can work best.


                        Genomics, particularly since the expansion of NGS, has transformed ecosystem ecology. By sequencing environmental DNA, we can now assess biodiversity without direct...
                        05-06-2026, 09:04 AM

                      ad_right_rmr

                      Collapse

                      News

                      Collapse

                      Topics Statistics Last Post
                      Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 12:03 PM
                      0 responses
                      19 views
                      0 reactions
                      Last Post SEQadmin2  
                      Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 11:40 AM
                      0 responses
                      14 views
                      0 reactions
                      Last Post SEQadmin2  
                      Started by SEQadmin2, 05-28-2026, 11:40 AM
                      0 responses
                      29 views
                      0 reactions
                      Last Post SEQadmin2  
                      Started by SEQadmin2, 05-26-2026, 10:12 AM
                      0 responses
                      31 views
                      0 reactions
                      Last Post SEQadmin2  
                      Working...