Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • a_mt
    Member
    • Jul 2012
    • 34

    finding DE genes from VSD normalized data

    Hi all,

    I have time series mRNA-seq data but without replicates.
    I have some doubts about calling DE genes with DESeq.

    I have used
    Code:
    varianceStabilizingTransformation
    function from DESeq to normalize count data. Now can I use this vsd transformed data to calculate fold change and to call DE genes?? may be using classic LIMMA package.. Is it good practice to do so ??

    I have tried
    Code:
    nbionTest
    on raw count too.. but after vsd transforming, data look more like microarray and I was wondering is it of any harm to call DE genes/FC change on vsd transfored data.. since in original DESeq paper they have made clear that count data follows poisson distribution unlike microarray which is more like normally distributed, but after vsd transformation, data looks more like normally distributed.

    Thank you.
  • chadn737
    Senior Member
    • Jan 2009
    • 392

    #2
    You should do replicates. And DESeq uses the negative binomial, not the poisson.

    Comment

    • a_mt
      Member
      • Jul 2012
      • 34

      #3
      Sorry, I meant to say in general count data follows poisson distribution.
      But,is it ok to use vsd normalized data to detect DE genes ?? and I don't have any replicates..

      Comment

      • chadn737
        Senior Member
        • Jan 2009
        • 392

        #4
        Does count data follow a poisson distribution? The authors of DESeq, EdgeR and others would disagree with that.

        And the purpose of VSD normalized data is not for calling differential expression, but for clustering, creating heat maps, etc. In the DESeq vignette they actually describes a protocol for analyzing data without replicates, however that does not mean you should! I honestly don't know how somebody would publish results without replicates, your really can't make sense of the data without them.
        Last edited by chadn737; 04-28-2013, 11:19 PM.

        Comment

        • a_mt
          Member
          • Jul 2012
          • 34

          #5
          ok.. not arguing.. but for your reference

          Background Finding genes that are differentially expressed between conditions is an integral part of understanding the molecular basis of phenotypic variation. In the past decades, DNA microarrays have been used extensively to quantify the abundance of mRNA corresponding to different genes, and more recently high-throughput sequencing of cDNA (RNA-seq) has emerged as a powerful competitor. As the cost of sequencing decreases, it is conceivable that the use of RNA-seq for differential expression analysis will increase rapidly. To exploit the possibilities and address the challenges posed by this relatively new type of data, a number of software packages have been developed especially for differential expression analysis of RNA-seq data. Results We conducted an extensive comparison of eleven methods for differential expression analysis of RNA-seq data. All methods are freely available within the R framework and take as input a matrix of counts, i.e. the number of reads mapping to each genomic feature of interest in each of a number of samples. We evaluate the methods based on both simulated data and real RNA-seq data. Conclusions Very small sample sizes, which are still common in RNA-seq experiments, impose problems for all evaluated methods and any results obtained under such conditions should be interpreted with caution. For larger sample sizes, the methods combining a variance-stabilizing transformation with the ‘limma’ method for differential expression analysis perform well under many different conditions, as does the nonparametric SAMseq method.


          and a quote from DESeq paper :

          If reads were independently sampled from a population with given, fixed fractions of genes, the read counts would follow a multinomial distribution, which can be approximated by the Poisson distribution.
          quote from DEGseq paper :

          Current observations suggest that typically RNA-seq experiments have low technical background noise (which could be checked using DEGseq) and the Poisson model fits data well.
          And even I think no replicate does not make any sense.. but the data I am using is a published one,and just I am trying out different methods to call DEG's.

          Comment

          • chadn737
            Senior Member
            • Jan 2009
            • 392

            #6
            Originally posted by a_mt View Post
            ok.. not arguing.. but for your reference

            Background Finding genes that are differentially expressed between conditions is an integral part of understanding the molecular basis of phenotypic variation. In the past decades, DNA microarrays have been used extensively to quantify the abundance of mRNA corresponding to different genes, and more recently high-throughput sequencing of cDNA (RNA-seq) has emerged as a powerful competitor. As the cost of sequencing decreases, it is conceivable that the use of RNA-seq for differential expression analysis will increase rapidly. To exploit the possibilities and address the challenges posed by this relatively new type of data, a number of software packages have been developed especially for differential expression analysis of RNA-seq data. Results We conducted an extensive comparison of eleven methods for differential expression analysis of RNA-seq data. All methods are freely available within the R framework and take as input a matrix of counts, i.e. the number of reads mapping to each genomic feature of interest in each of a number of samples. We evaluate the methods based on both simulated data and real RNA-seq data. Conclusions Very small sample sizes, which are still common in RNA-seq experiments, impose problems for all evaluated methods and any results obtained under such conditions should be interpreted with caution. For larger sample sizes, the methods combining a variance-stabilizing transformation with the ‘limma’ method for differential expression analysis perform well under many different conditions, as does the nonparametric SAMseq method.


            and a quote from DESeq paper :



            quote from DEGseq paper :



            And even I think no replicate does not make any sense.. but the data I am using is a published one,and just I am trying out different methods to call DEG's.
            I apologize if I came across a little strongly.

            From the DESeq paper:

            "However, it has been noted [1,8] that the assumption of Poisson distribution is too restrictive: it predicts smaller variations than what is seen in the data. Therefore, the resulting statistical test does not control type-I error (the probability of false discoveries) as advertised."

            In other words, the Poisson distribution leads to false positives and is not suitable. That is why DESeq is based on a Negative Binomial, not a Poisson distribution:

            "To address this so-called overdispersion problem, it has been proposed to model count data with negative binomial (NB) distributions [9], and this approach is used in the edgeR package for analysis of SAGE and RNA-Seq [8,10]."

            The DESeq vignette provides protocols for analyzing data without technical replicates.

            Go here: http://bioconductor.org/packages/rel.../doc/DESeq.pdf

            and read section 3.3 titled "Working without any replicates." That will tell you how to do this in DESeq. The purpose of the VSD normalized data is to put everything on the same scale for clustering and other sorts of analysis, not for differential expression.
            Last edited by chadn737; 04-29-2013, 06:35 AM.

            Comment

            Latest Articles

            Collapse

            • seqadmin
              Pathogen Surveillance with Advanced Genomic Tools
              by seqadmin




              The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for proactive pathogen surveillance systems. As ongoing threats like avian influenza and newly emerging infections continue to pose risks, researchers are working to improve how quickly and accurately pathogens can be identified and tracked. In a recent SEQanswers webinar, two experts discussed how next-generation sequencing (NGS) and machine learning are shaping efforts to monitor viral variation and trace the origins of infectious...
              03-24-2025, 11:48 AM
            • seqadmin
              New Genomics Tools and Methods Shared at AGBT 2025
              by seqadmin


              This year’s Advances in Genome Biology and Technology (AGBT) General Meeting commemorated the 25th anniversary of the event at its original venue on Marco Island, Florida. While this year’s event didn’t include high-profile musical performances, the industry announcements and cutting-edge research still drew the attention of leading scientists.

              The Headliner
              The biggest announcement was Roche stepping back into the sequencing platform market. In the years since...
              03-03-2025, 01:39 PM

            ad_right_rmr

            Collapse

            News

            Collapse

            Topics Statistics Last Post
            Started by seqadmin, 03-20-2025, 05:03 AM
            0 responses
            49 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Started by seqadmin, 03-19-2025, 07:27 AM
            0 responses
            57 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Started by seqadmin, 03-18-2025, 12:50 PM
            0 responses
            49 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Started by seqadmin, 03-03-2025, 01:15 PM
            0 responses
            200 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Working...