Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • found
    Junior Member
    • Feb 2009
    • 8

    Cuffdiff-confidence interval

    Hi, everybody, I have a problem about cuffdiff. I used cuffdiff to test differential expression. However, I checked the "genes.fpkm_tracking". All the FPKM estimate have q1_conf_lo=0, and q1_conf_hi a big number, which means the 95% confidence interval are very large. It seems not reasonable. I am not sure if the test statistic is calculated by this intervals. If it is, then the number of the deferentially expressed genes would be smaller.

    I also try to use cufflinks to estimate the expression level. and "genes.fpkm_tracking" produced by cufflinks have reasonable intervals. I remember cuffdiff used cufflinks quantification engine. So they should have similar result, right? Anyone have any ideas for this problems?

    Thanks a lot
  • IBseq
    Member
    • Jul 2012
    • 56

    #2
    did you get any answer?

    ib

    Comment

    • IBseq
      Member
      • Jul 2012
      • 56

      #3
      did you find a solution? I have the same problem...

      ib

      Comment

      • found
        Junior Member
        • Feb 2009
        • 8

        #4
        No, I did not get reply.
        However, I think the variance difference is just caused by numerical reasons. Since I do not have experimental replicate, using cufflinks to estimate the expression only consider the variance from the model, such as the variation resulting from the assignment a read to which isoform or possion distribution. this variance do not have any biological meaning. The true variance should include both the model variance and the biological replicate variance.

        In cuffdiff, which compare expression difference from two samples/conditions. I believe it estimate the variance from two different samples/conditions. but in this case, the hypothesis that most genes have similar expression level is not necessarily hold. So I think that is the reason why the variance is larger in cuffdiff result.

        What's your opinion?

        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, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
        0 responses
        23 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
        0 responses
        23 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
        0 responses
        23 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
        0 responses
        55 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Working...