Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • billstevens
    Senior Member
    • Mar 2012
    • 120

    #16
    Originally posted by masterpiece View Post
    "So tell me, which one gives the best result and explain me why (answer not more than 50 words and use only layman term)?"
    Haha, this might have been the best thing I've seen on SeqAnswers.

    There's also DEXSeq, which does splicing, so at least you can have some consistency in your method. Whatever you do, don't stick with 1.4, as even the authors will tell you, that version was not good.

    One thing you mentioned about lab work, I'm assuming you mean qPCR. How do you handle it with fold changes less than 2? I get many genes that DESeq says are differentially expressed, and the fold change might be as low as 1.25, and no one in my lab seems to think I can validate that with qPCR.

    Comment

    • masterpiece
      Member
      • Mar 2009
      • 40

      #17
      Originally posted by billstevens View Post

      One thing you mentioned about lab work, I'm assuming you mean qPCR. How do you handle it with fold changes less than 2? I get many genes that DESeq says are differentially expressed, and the fold change might be as low as 1.25, and no one in my lab seems to think I can validate that with qPCR.
      May I know do you have replicates in your analysis. Without replicates, the statistics shown will not be strong enough to support your results.

      Normally in my case, apart from using p-value or FDR to get a list of differently expressed genes, I'll also include in log2foldchange set at +/-2. Maybe you should try include log2foldchange and see how many differently expressed genes left.

      Comment

      • billstevens
        Senior Member
        • Mar 2012
        • 120

        #18
        Yes, I definitely have replicates.

        If I only kept log2foldchange set at 2, I would lose the majority of my genes, and DESeq becomes much less powerful.

        I guess the fundamental question I'm asking here is, if you can't do it verify via qPCR, should you call the gene differentially expressed. And if so, then the "power" of all of these software programs is kinda useless.

        Comment

        • masterpiece
          Member
          • Mar 2009
          • 40

          #19
          billstevens

          Unfortunately I don't think I can help you on this. My task is generating results from sequence reads, run the statistics analysis. Later i pass them to other person in our lab for validation test through qPCR. I my self don't have any experience running the test. And I'm not sure if genes with fold change as low as 1.25 can be validated through qPCR.

          As in our case we set p-val = 0.05 and log2foldchange =+/-2 for the genes to be differently express, so we don't face the problem that you have mentioned.

          Comment

          • vinay052003
            Member
            • Jan 2010
            • 59

            #20
            Hi guys,
            After reading through the discussion above I am realizing that I should also try DESeq. I have two multi-replicate samples and ran cuffdiff on them. Cuffdiff produces a read count files in output that has three types of read counts (actual, internally adjusted andexternlly adjusted) for each transcript in each replicate. Which one should I use for DESeq?

            Comment

            • masterpiece
              Member
              • Mar 2009
              • 40

              #21
              vinay052003,

              As far I know, you can't use cuffdiff output to be used in DEseq run. You have to start from bam files generated by tophat and run through Htseq-count and DEseq

              tophat -> Htseq-count -> DEseq

              For more details on how to run the DEseq you can refer threads below and others in seqanswer



              Discussion of next-gen sequencing related bioinformatics: resources, algorithms, open source efforts, etc
              Last edited by masterpiece; 10-09-2012, 07:48 PM.

              Comment

              • drdna
                Member
                • May 2012
                • 76

                #22
                Cufflinks/cuffdiff, etc. outputs garbage - don't trust it - don't use it. I have spent a considerable amount of time checking outputs against the raw alignment files and the number and magnitude of errors is quite astounding. Use HTseq-count and DEseq instead.

                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
                  ...
                  Yesterday, 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
                • 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

                ad_right_rmr

                Collapse

                News

                Collapse

                Topics Statistics Last Post
                Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 02:55 AM
                0 responses
                9 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-24-2026, 12:17 PM
                0 responses
                12 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-23-2026, 11:41 AM
                0 responses
                12 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-20-2026, 11:10 AM
                0 responses
                24 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Working...