Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • travelk
    Member
    • Jul 2013
    • 20

    Spearman correlation test: FPKM or counts?

    I'm not sure if this is very obvious but I'm not a statistician so I thought I would confirm with the more knowledgeable people on this site.


    I would like to do a Spearman correlation between genes on my RNA-Seq data (which I've seen done in various papers). However, they only say "Spearman correlation on gene expression data" and I don't know if that means on counts or FPKM. I've looked around and some papers do FPKM/RPKM (but not necessarily between genes but rather between conditions/treatments) but in message boards, they normally recommend counts but without explaining why. Can anyone enlighten me? Is there any difference between the two?

    I've normalized the counts using DESeq size factors.

    Thanks for your insight!
  • swbarnes2
    Senior Member
    • May 2008
    • 910

    #2
    RPKM is counts, but corrected for differences in gene length between genes, and differences in overall read numbers between samples. You certainly do need to correct for the fact that not all samples get the same # of reads; you don't want one sample ranking as #1 for every gene because it got twice as many reads as everything else. Correcting for gene length is likely not going to matter since you are ranking.

    Comment

    Latest Articles

    Collapse

    • 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...
      Today, 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
    • SEQadmin2
      Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
      by SEQadmin2


      I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

      Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
      06-18-2026, 07:11 AM

    ad_right_rmr

    Collapse

    News

    Collapse

    Topics Statistics Last Post
    Started by SEQadmin2, Today, 10:08 AM
    0 responses
    5 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 11:05 AM
    0 responses
    7 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
    0 responses
    29 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
    0 responses
    28 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Working...