Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Heisman
    Senior Member
    • Dec 2010
    • 534

    #1

    Calculating Ti/Tv ratio

    Hey all,

    Quick question. When, for example, it's stated that for human exomes a Ti/Tv ratio of around 3.0 is expected, does that refer to the number of transitions divided by the number of transversions, or the number of transitions multiplied by 2 divided by the number of transversions (ie, absolute counts or rates)? I've been googling around and I think it's rates but I want to be absolutely sure that the commonly reported expected ratios refer to rates as well. Thanks for any help.
  • SES
    Senior Member
    • Mar 2010
    • 275

    #2
    It sounds like you are confusing the Ti/Tv ratio with the ratio of the Ti/Tv rates. The first calculation you mention would be like something you would do to get the ratio of the rates. The Ti/Tv ratio is simply the ratio of the number of transitions to the number of transversions for a pair of sequences. Be sure to pay attention to the model of evolution used in the studies you are referring to, otherwise you may not get the same results.

    Comment

    • Heisman
      Senior Member
      • Dec 2010
      • 534

      #3
      Originally posted by SES View Post
      It sounds like you are confusing the Ti/Tv ratio with the ratio of the Ti/Tv rates. The first calculation you mention would be like something you would do to get the ratio of the rates. The Ti/Tv ratio is simply the ratio of the number of transitions to the number of transversions for a pair of sequences. Be sure to pay attention to the model of evolution used in the studies you are referring to, otherwise you may not get the same results.
      Ok, so for example, if I have 100 SNPs, 75 of them are transitions, and 25 are transversions, then the Ti/Tv ratio would be 75:25 = 3.0? Based on the last paragraph here http://www.broadinstitute.org/gsa/wi...php/QC_Methods , it looks like that calculation (75/25) would suffice and give me an expected value for an exome.

      But then, reading the second reply here http://www.biostars.org/post/show/47...ral-rule/#4758 indicates I should be multiplying by a factor of 2, if I understand correctly. Hence, it would be 75*2/25 = 6.0

      I'm still not sure if I should throw in that factor of 2 when comparing to established whole genome or whole exome values.

      Comment

      • SES
        Senior Member
        • Mar 2010
        • 275

        #4
        I believe the discussion you are referring to in the latter link is about the observed difference in Ti/Tv rates for the whole genome vs. those rates when only looking at exome data. The first link also has a discussion of this point in that final paragraph. I don't think you should be multiplying by any factor. There is a worked example of this calculation on the snpEff homepage that may clarify this point.

        Comment

        • Heisman
          Senior Member
          • Dec 2010
          • 534

          #5
          Originally posted by SES View Post
          I believe the discussion you are referring to in the latter link is about the observed difference in Ti/Tv rates for the whole genome vs. those rates when only looking at exome data. The first link also has a discussion of this point in that final paragraph. I don't think you should be multiplying by any factor. There is a worked example of this calculation on the snpEff homepage that may clarify this point.
          Ah, cool. No multiplication factor then. Thanks!

          Comment

          Latest Articles

          Collapse

          • SEQadmin2
            Beyond CRISPR/Cas9: Understand, Choose, and Use the Right Genome Editing Tool
            by SEQadmin2



            CRISPR/Cas9 sparked the gene editing revolution for both research and therapeutics.1 But this system still showed severe issues that limited its applications. The most prominent were the heavy reliance on PAM sequences, delivery limitations, double-stranded breaks that prompt unintended edits and cell death, and editing inefficiency (both in targeting and in knock-in reliability).

            Despite this, “CRISPR helped turn genome editing from a specialized technique into
            ...
            07-31-2026, 11:01 AM
          • SEQadmin2
            Proteomic Platforms: How to Choose the Right Analytical Strategy to Improve Detection and Clinical Applications
            by SEQadmin2


            Proteomics platforms are evolving rapidly, with advances in mass spectrometry and affinity-based approaches expanding what researchers can detect and at what scale. As the field moves toward deeper proteome coverage and clinical applications, scientists face an increasingly complex landscape of tools. This article will explore how researchers are navigating these choices to find the right platform for their work.

            The systematic characterization of the human proteome has
            ...
            07-20-2026, 11:48 AM

          ad_right_rmr

          Collapse

          News

          Collapse

          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by SEQadmin2, 08-06-2026, 07:41 AM
          0 responses
          17 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 08-03-2026, 10:13 AM
          0 responses
          33 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 07-31-2026, 02:55 AM
          0 responses
          43 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 07-24-2026, 12:17 PM
          0 responses
          26 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Working...