Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • rutgers2015
    Junior Member
    • Aug 2014
    • 2

    #1

    DESeq2 - using contrasts vs. multiple runs for DE analysis

    Hello all,

    I have a time series dataset with 4 time points (no other factors besides time). What is the better, more statistically sound strategy to test genes in each time point against one another for DE:

    1) Run DESeq on the entire data set (4 time points * 3 replicates each) and extract each contrast using results(dds, contrast = c("time",x,y) for a total of 6 results tables ( 1 v 2, 1 v 3, 1 v 4, 2 v 3, 2 v 4, 3 v 4)

    2) Run DESeq six times on six different data sets, with 2 time points in each, and use the results table from each run.

    I plan on extracting all genes that have at least LFC of 1 and padj < 0.05 . Applying this filter on a result table from (2) gives me less genes than on the corresponding table in (1). Does this mean that running the analysis individually for each comparison is more stringent?

    Any help would be appreciated.
  • dpryan
    Devon Ryan
    • Jul 2011
    • 3478

    #2
    Option 1 is generally the better idea. Option 2 isn't more stringent, you just have fewer total samples so that'll affect your variance estimates and degrees of freedom.

    Comment

    • friducha
      Junior Member
      • Jan 2015
      • 9

      #3
      Hi,

      I am in a similar situation with my data.

      I have three conditions, with 4 replicates for CondA, 2 replicates for CondB, and 2 replicates for CondC.

      When I run DESeq using all 8 samples, I get 197 DE genes with a padj < 0.1 for contrast CondB/CondA.

      However, when I take out the samples from CondC from the counts matrix, for the same contrast CondB/CondA, I get only 170 DE genes.

      So in my case, the second method is more stringent... although I would like to understand why this happens.

      Thanks for your help.

      Comment

      Latest Articles

      Collapse

      • kinpict.com
        Reply to 16S/ITS Profiling vs. Shotgun Metagenomics: What Changes in Your Workflow?
        by kinpict.com
        The part about this topic feels surprisingly grounded, and the details on the page is the bit that made me slow down. I’d keep <a href="https://kinpict.com/">ai family photo generator</a> bookmarked for later.
        Today, 06:37 PM
      • SEQadmin2
        16S/ITS Profiling vs. Shotgun Metagenomics: What Changes in Your Workflow?
        by SEQadmin2





        NGS has revolutionized clinical microbiology by offering new ways to identify and surveil pathogens without prior knowledge of the target. One popular approach is 16S rRNA and ITS amplicon sequencing, which targets specific microbial markers. But studies are increasingly incorporating shotgun metagenomics, a technique that sequences all DNA from a sample without targeting specific microbial markers. This approach allows more detailed taxonomic classification,...
        10-30-2026, 06:46 AM

      ad_right_rmr

      Collapse

      News

      Collapse

      Topics Statistics Last Post
      Started by SEQadmin2, 11-12-2026, 07:59 AM
      0 responses
      27 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 11-05-2026, 09:25 AM
      0 responses
      35 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 11-03-2026, 11:54 AM
      2 responses
      56 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post kinpict.com  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 10-28-2026, 09:57 AM
      0 responses
      175 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Working...