Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • alittleboy
    Member
    • Apr 2011
    • 60

    #1

    pattern of p-values for DE testing for RNA-Seq data

    I have a very general question on roughly checking the results of DE tests for RNA-Seq data.

    After a proper comparison of a control and treatment group using, say, edgeR, DESeq, etc., we can plot the histogram of raw p-values and see if there is any strange pattern there. I think if there is strong signal in the treatment group, and the test is good, then the DE test raw p-values should have a histogram that looks like this: it is used to illustrate FDR methodology, but I think maybe in general, we should always observe such a p-value histogram. Otherwise, if there are so few or so many very small p-values, then there may be something wrong with the test itself?

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts and your experience :0
  • sdriscoll
    I like code
    • Sep 2009
    • 436

    #2
    I'm sorry if I misunderstand...but are you arguing that for all experiments we should see the same proportion of statistically significant DE genes?
    /* Shawn Driscoll, Gene Expression Laboratory, Pfaff
    Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, CA, USA */

    Comment

    • alittleboy
      Member
      • Apr 2011
      • 60

      #3
      Originally posted by sdriscoll View Post
      I'm sorry if I misunderstand...but are you arguing that for all experiments we should see the same proportion of statistically significant DE genes?
      Well, I guess not, but I think a histogram like what the link points to should be more reasonable... What do you think? Did you ever plot the p-value histograms for the DE test results? THANKS

      Comment

      • rskr
        Senior Member
        • Oct 2010
        • 249

        #4
        That could be one possible outcome, if the two groups you are comparing are sufficiently similar and you have enough data, and your statistics were powerful enough.

        However, it could indicate another problem that you don't have enough samples or reads in the samples to produce a significant result in many of your genes if there were in fact a difference. Also your statistics may not take into account the counts for example, and so may not be powerful enough to discern a difference. Maybe you could plot the fold change histogram, and see if that is similar to your DE p-value plot, to get some idea. If you have a large number of high fold changes that are insignificant, then you probably have a problem, with concluding that there are only supposed to be a few significantly differentially expressed genes, though there may be nothing wrong with the significance of the genes found.

        Comment

        • sdriscoll
          I like code
          • Sep 2009
          • 436

          #5
          I was going to add...the assumption about the p-value histogram sounds correct if you're making a comparison between controls. If you're doing a real experiment and 10% of the measurable genes really are misexpressed then the histogram will be different and unique to that experiment.
          /* Shawn Driscoll, Gene Expression Laboratory, Pfaff
          Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, CA, USA */

          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
          23 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 08-03-2026, 10:13 AM
          0 responses
          37 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...