Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • chariko
    Member
    • Jun 2010
    • 56

    RnaSeq vs Microarray correlation

    Hi all,

    I have an experiment with 80 samples both of them run with microarray and RnaSeq. I want to correlate the results between the two technologies.

    I received the results from the RnaSeq experiment in two ways:

    a) Raw data (fastq files)
    b)Table of ensembl id´s counts (no idea how this analysis was done).

    I did the analysis in two ways:

    1)
    For the RnaSeq experiment I took the ensembl id´s counts, translated them into Gene Symbol identifiers (various ensembl Id`s derived in the same Gene Symbol so I just used one of them randomly selected and the other ensembl id´s were discarded), and normalized them with voom (log2 with some modifications).

    For the Microarray experiment I normalized them (RMA) using a curated database (hgu133plus2hsentrezgcdf). I translated the entrez id´s probes into Gene Symbol identifiers.

    I did the correlation between microarray and RnaSeq (cor.test, two sides, spearman method)) and I obtained good results for all the samples (07-0.9). Attached figure 1 with the scatterplot of sample 1.

    2)
    I took the fastq files and analyzed them taking into account the HG19 GRC 37 RefSeq as reference. I translated the refseq id´s into gene symbol. I randomly selected one gene symbol per refseq id.

    Same microarray data was used for the correlation.

    I did the same correlatin as before but the results were worse (0.3-48). Figure 2 shows scatterplot of sample 1.

    My question is, does anybody have a clue about why starting with refseq id´s is not giving the same good results? Any clues?

    Thanks in advance.
    Attached Files

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • 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, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
0 responses
19 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
0 responses
20 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
0 responses
21 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
0 responses
54 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Working...