Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • rossini
    Junior Member
    • Aug 2011
    • 3

    cuffdiff output different FPKM if the comparing samples are different

    Hi,

    Hope someone can kindly help me. I am confused about why the FPKM of a gene is different if different comparing samples are used!

    I have four samples (say A, B, C, and D) and I run two cuffdiff processes:

    cuffdiff I: cuffdiff annotation.gtf -p 8 sampleA sampleB sampleC
    cuffdiff II: cuffdiff annotation.gtf -p 8 sampleA sampleB sampleC sampleD

    (1)The FPKM of gene X in sampleA (and also in sampleB and sampleC) should be the same in both cuffdiff I and cuffdiff II. However, they are different.

    (2) Even though for gene Y, cuffdiff I and cuffdiff II have similar log2(sampleA(Y)/sampleB(Y)), the t-statistic from cuffdiff I and cuffdiff II are quite different. cuffdiff II seem to have smaller value of the t-statistic even if the log ratio of sampleA/sampleB are similar in cuffdiff I and cuffdiff II.

    The weird thing is that all the parameters are the same between cuffdiff I and cuffdiff II. The only difference is I add one more sample (sampleD).

    Does this mean that the detection of differential expression largely dependent on the number of samples you provide? It seems that both the FPKM and the way they calculate t-statistic (between two samples) are influenced by the number of samples you provide, although some of the samples are not even compared (in my case, sampleC and sampleD). This would cause a big issue especially when dealing with time course data.

    Thanks for your kind help.
    Last edited by rossini; 09-02-2011, 08:18 PM.
  • chenyao
    Member
    • Jul 2011
    • 74

    #2
    what's the version of cufflinks?

    Comment

    • rossini
      Junior Member
      • Aug 2011
      • 3

      #3
      I used the latest version: 1.0.3 release - 6/1/2011

      Comment

      • wangxj
        Junior Member
        • Sep 2012
        • 7

        #4
        I have the same problem.I found that different expression gene from I is more than II,and include II.
        My cuffdiff version is 2.0.2.

        Comment

        • Krish_143
          Member
          • Jan 2012
          • 45

          #5
          Acoording to me:
          cufdiff results will vary based on how many samples your providing, It always calculate based on the first sample. It will produce better results if one have more no of replicates. else cufdiff is not a best option when you do not have any replicates and trying to find differentally expressed genes across many samples.. that might not be good idea.

          Try cufdiff only when replicates are available then it gives better result.
          Krishna

          Comment

          • Isabel Gerhardt
            Junior Member
            • Mar 2013
            • 2

            #6
            Hi Rossini,
            I observed the same as you. I have 3 tissues, 3 genotypes and 2 biological replicates. When I run cuffdiff with all samples and compare the number of differentially expressed genes between sample A and sample B, I have twice the number of differentially expressed genes than when I run sample A and sample B.
            Did you figure out why?

            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
            7 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...