Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • discrepance in DESeq2 results with different design structures

    Hi,

    I am doing a DESeq2 analysis using a data set of nine different conditions/time-points.
    I first ran the analysis with the complete data set in the count table and than have used the results function to extract the pair-wise results of the DE analysis.
    Code:
    >count_table <- read.delim2("count_table_complete.txt",row.names=1)
    
    >colData <- read.delim2("metaData.txt")
    >levels(colData$condition)
    [1] "CR4W0h"  "CR4W24h" "CR4W4h"  "CTRL0h"  "CTRL24h" "CTRL4h"  "HP0h"    "HP24h"   "HP4h"   
    
    >cds <- DESeqDataSetFromMatrix (
      countData= count_table[,-1],
      colData    = colData,  
      design     = ~condition )
    
    >fit = DESeq(cds)
    
    >res = results(fit, contrast=c("condition", "CTRL0h" , "HP0h") )
    > res
    log2 fold change (MAP): condition CTRL0h vs HP0h 
    Wald test p-value: condition CTRL0h vs HP0h 
    DataFrame with 39179 rows and 6 columns
                          baseMean log2FoldChange      lfcSE       stat     pvalue      padj
                         <numeric>      <numeric>  <numeric>  <numeric>  <numeric> <numeric>
    ENSMUSG00000000001 [B][COLOR="Red"]3093.215856[/COLOR][/B]    0.002814819 0.08192671 0.03435777 0.97259186  0.998355
    When doing so, I get only 3 genes with an adjusted p-value below 0.05
    Code:
    >table(res$padj<=0.05)
    
    FALSE  TRUE 
     1956     3
    But if i ran the same analysis with the subset of the data which contains only the columns from the count table for "CTRL0h" and "HP0h" I get many more significant genes.

    Code:
    > count_table <- read.delim2("count_table_complete.txt",row.names=1)
    > count_subset <- count_table[,c(2:5,23:26)]
    > head(count_subset)
                        C20  C22  C23  C24 HP10 HP11 HP12 HP14
    ENSMUSG00000000001 2811 2360 3053 3334 2636 2736 2505 3282
    
    > colData_subset <- colData[c(1:4, 23:26),]  
    
    >cds_subset <- DESeqDataSetFromMatrix (
      countData= count_subset,
      colData    = colData_subset,  
      design     = ~condition )
    
    >fit_subset = DESeq(cds_subset)
    
    >res_subset = results(fit_subset, contrast=c("condition", "CTRL0h" , "HP0h") )
    > res_subset
    log2 fold change (MAP): condition CTRL0h vs HP0h 
    Wald test p-value: condition CTRL0h vs HP0h 
    DataFrame with 39179 rows and 6 columns
                           baseMean log2FoldChange      lfcSE       stat      pvalue      padj
                          <numeric>      <numeric>  <numeric>  <numeric>   <numeric> <numeric>
    ENSMUSG00000000001 [B][COLOR="Red"]2810.6322989 [/COLOR][/B]  -0.003504429 0.05504337 -0.0636667 0.949235621 0.9938743
    
    > table(res$padj<= 0.05)
    
    FALSE  TRUE 
    13122   321
    first I see a difference in the baseMean values. I guess this might be because for some of the conditions/TP I have more samples than the others, so that the baseMean is calculated differently (Am I correct in this assumption?)

    But I can't figure out why I get such a big different in the number of DE genes between the two approaches.

    Is it because of the differences in the independent filtering step, DESeq2 is automatically doing?
    I have tried to deactivate the independent filtering in the results function, but it didn't make the results better.

    Any other suggestions?

    thanks,
    Assa

  • #2
    I will answer on your post @ bioc support site today

    Comment

    Latest Articles

    Collapse

    • seqadmin
      Best Practices for Single-Cell Sequencing Analysis
      by seqadmin



      While isolating and preparing single cells for sequencing was historically the bottleneck, recent technological advancements have shifted the challenge to data analysis. This highlights the rapidly evolving nature of single-cell sequencing. The inherent complexity of single-cell analysis has intensified with the surge in data volume and the incorporation of diverse and more complex datasets. This article explores the challenges in analysis, examines common pitfalls, offers...
      06-06-2024, 07:15 AM
    • seqadmin
      Latest Developments in Precision Medicine
      by seqadmin



      Technological advances have led to drastic improvements in the field of precision medicine, enabling more personalized approaches to treatment. This article explores four leading groups that are overcoming many of the challenges of genomic profiling and precision medicine through their innovative platforms and technologies.

      Somatic Genomics
      “We have such a tremendous amount of genetic diversity that exists within each of us, and not just between us as individuals,”...
      05-24-2024, 01:16 PM

    ad_right_rmr

    Collapse

    News

    Collapse

    Topics Statistics Last Post
    Started by seqadmin, 06-07-2024, 06:58 AM
    0 responses
    179 views
    0 likes
    Last Post seqadmin  
    Started by seqadmin, 06-06-2024, 08:18 AM
    0 responses
    223 views
    0 likes
    Last Post seqadmin  
    Started by seqadmin, 06-06-2024, 08:04 AM
    0 responses
    184 views
    0 likes
    Last Post seqadmin  
    Started by seqadmin, 06-03-2024, 06:55 AM
    0 responses
    18 views
    0 likes
    Last Post seqadmin  
    Working...
    X