Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Slacanch
    Member
    • Jan 2013
    • 10

    #1

    DEseq2 gives constant adjusted p-values

    I am doing some exploratory analyses on two datasets without replicates. i found it strange that irrespective of the calculated p-value, the adjusted p-value has constant value across all features. this value was 0.9999295.

    is there a known cause to this? does it relate to the fact that no replicates are being used?

    Thanks
  • dpryan
    Devon Ryan
    • Jul 2011
    • 3478

    #2
    No replicates? Yeah, you shouldn't expect to get anything significant in that case. Anyway, the actual answer is that the resulting adjusted values isn't strictly related to the lack of replicates, but is instead dependent on the distribution of the unadjusted p-values. DESeq2 uses the BH method from the p.adjust() function, as is the case for pretty much every other package. If you have a more or less uniform distribution of raw p-values, you should expect the adjusted p-values to be ~1.

    Comment

    • Slacanch
      Member
      • Jan 2013
      • 10

      #3
      I am well aware of the consequences of having no replicates, as it has rightly been stated in multiple threads already

      i just find it odd that every single adjusted p-value has the same exact value. i just checked the distribution of p-values and it is rather uniform (with a downward trend when approaching zero), but i still don't understand how having exactly the same value at all genes is possible.

      Comment

      • dpryan
        Devon Ryan
        • Jul 2011
        • 3478

        #4
        Well, given what you describe, they should all be about 1. Any deviation from that is just due to how things are implemented (plus the joys of floating point arithmetic).

        Comment

        • Slacanch
          Member
          • Jan 2013
          • 10

          #5
          ooooh, so the value would be 1 everywhere but because of floating point approximation shenanigans it turns out to be 0.99 bla bla.

          it makes sense, i tried other correction methods and they all give either 1 or the same 0.999 value i had with the benjamini. so i would say it makes sense.

          Comment

          • dpryan
            Devon Ryan
            • Jul 2011
            • 3478

            #6
            Yup. If you're curious, this is how R does the BH adjustment method:
            Code:
            i <- lp:1L
            o <- order(p, decreasing = TRUE)
            ro <- order(o)
            pmin(1, cummin(n/i * p[o]))[ro]
            You input "p" and the adjusted values are the output of cummin() with a max value of 1. "lp" is just the length of the input vector.

            Comment

            Latest Articles

            Collapse

            • SEQadmin2
              Multiomic Liquid Biopsy: What DNA/RNA Panels Reveal That DNA Alone Can’t
              by SEQadmin2



              Tumors contain complex mixtures of cell populations that evolve in response to treatment and host-specific factors. Tissue biopsies provide only static snapshots of a tumor’s state. But what if we could follow that evolution over time using a minimally invasive technique?

              Liquid biopsies can detect tumor-derived material circulating in the bloodstream, providing a way to study treatment response, detect emerging resistance, and discover new biomarkers. Circulating
              ...
              10-14-2026, 09:55 AM
            • SEQadmin2
              New Genomics Technologies Take Aim at Long-Standing Limits
              by SEQadmin2


              Researchers using sequencing and genomics tools often have to make trade-offs. They can choose between speed or scale, short reads or long-range information, or targeted panels or a view of the whole transcriptome. New technologies that have been released this year are built to address those tough choices.

              We asked six companies the same four questions to learn about their latest products. The new technologies bring a lot to the table, including rethinking sequencing
              ...
              09-28-2026, 10:25 AM

            ad_right_rmr

            Collapse

            News

            Collapse

            Topics Statistics Last Post
            Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 11:13 AM
            0 responses
            31 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 10:48 AM
            0 responses
            22 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 10-15-2026, 10:52 AM
            0 responses
            39 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 10-14-2026, 05:39 AM
            0 responses
            45 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Working...