Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • beeman
    Member
    • May 2012
    • 20

    FPKM values differ for sample sample between comparisons?

    Hi I have three biological samples (lets call them Sample_A-C)that I want to find DEGs between. Firstly, I'm performing pairwise comparisons between samples using cuffdiff using alignments generated using tophat.

    The problem is when I compare the fpkm value of genes in Sample_A (in the gene_exp.diff file), the values differ depending on whether the comparison of Sample_A was against Sample_B or Sample_C.

    How is this difference generated? I thought when running cuffdiff the fpkm value would be static and would originate from the mapping data in the bam/sam file used as input for cuffdiff.

    Here is just the header and the first gene in the gene_exp.diff file.
    Sample_A vs Sample_B
    test_id gene_id gene locus sample_1 sample_2 status value_1 value_2 log2(fold_change) test_stat p_value q_value significant
    ACYPI000001 ACYPI000001 acyp2eg0000191 chr1:2365250-2374181 q1 q2 OK 21.6621 25.2228 0.219556 0.389799 0.71015 0.991694 no
    Sample_A vs Sample_C
    test_id gene_id gene locus sample_1 sample_2 status value_1 value_2 log2(fold_change) test_stat p_value q_value significant
    ACYPI000001 ACYPI000001 acyp2eg0000191 chr1:2365250-2374181 q1 q2 OK 26.0189 587.227 4.49629 4.16814 0.0011 0.422675 no

    So as you can see, when compared against Sample_B, the fpkm value of ACYPI000001 in Sample_A is 21.6621 and in the second comparison it's 26.0189

    There are even more pronounced differences in these datasets and I just don't get why these differences are arising.

    Can someone please shed some light on what may be underlying this?

    Thanks

    EDIT: I'm using cufflinks version 2.1.1
    cmd# cuffdiff -p 5 -o sample_A_vs_sample_B annotations.gff sample_A_accepted_hits.bam sample_B_accepted_hits.bam
    Last edited by beeman; 04-16-2014, 07:06 PM. Reason: adding more info
  • yueluo
    Member
    • Aug 2013
    • 82

    #2
    You might want to read about 'Library Normalization Methods' on the cufflinks manual:



    FPKMs and fragment counts are scaled via the median of the geometric means of fragment counts across all libraries, as described in Anders and Huber (Genome Biology, 2010). This policy identical to the one used by DESeq. (default for Cuffdiff)

    Comment

    • beeman
      Member
      • May 2012
      • 20

      #3
      Great thanks for the info

      Comment

      • bhennuy
        Junior Member
        • May 2009
        • 6

        #4
        Hello,
        Did you try to compare the three conditions in the same process with cuffdiff ?
        As explained, Cuffdiff should support that with "cuffdiff sample1 sample2 sample3". The 3 conditions should be compared instead of doing several pairwise comparison. In my case, it doesn't work ! Do you know if some options should be used to do that.
        Thanks

        Comment

        Latest Articles

        Collapse

        • 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
        • SEQadmin2
          Cancer Drug Resistance: The Lingering Barrier to Rising Survival
          by SEQadmin2



          Cancer survival rates have significantly increased in the last few decades in the United States, reaching a combined 70% 5-year survival rate by 2021. Behind this number, there are years of research to find new therapies, drug targets, and early detection methods. But there is one core challenge that keeps slowing down these advances, and it’s about drug resistance.

          There is no single reason why many patients don’t respond to treatment as expected. Cancer is...
          07-08-2026, 05:17 AM
        • 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

        ad_right_rmr

        Collapse

        News

        Collapse

        Topics Statistics Last Post
        Started by SEQadmin2, Today, 10:26 AM
        0 responses
        10 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 07-09-2026, 10:04 AM
        0 responses
        24 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 07-08-2026, 10:08 AM
        0 responses
        16 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 07-07-2026, 11:05 AM
        0 responses
        33 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Working...