Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • mrandel
    Junior Member
    • Sep 2013
    • 3

    #1

    DESeq2 fold change does not match normalized counts data

    I am trying to understand how DESeq2 calculates Log2foldchange, because it does not match my calculations of fold change from my normalized counts.

    My script:
    CountTable_POS = read.table("DIF_pos_counts", header=TRUE, sep="")
    Design = data.frame( row.names = colnames( CountTable_POS ),
    condition = c( "untreated", "untreated", "untreated",
    "treated", "treated", "treated" ),
    type = c( "single-end", "single-end", "single-end",
    "single-end", "single-end","single-end" ) )
    dds_pos<-DESeqDataSetFromMatrix(countData = CountTable_POS,
    colData = Design,
    design = ~ condition)
    dds_pos<-DESeq(dds_pos, fitType="local")
    norm<-counts(dds_pos, normalized=T)
    write.csv(as.data.frame(norm), file="norm_counts.csv")
    res_pos<-results(dds_pos, contrast=c("condition", "treated", "untreated"))
    write.csv(as.data.frame(res_pos), file="DESeq2_out.csv")

    RESULTS
    from norm_counts.csv:
    Locus Control1 Control2 Control3 Treated1 Treated2 Treated3 Mean_Control Mean_Treated Basemean Fold change
    2R_188654 3.8127 5.7220 5.7191 1.9351 4.9898 2.9518 5.0846 3.2922 4.1884 0.6475
    2R_188736 3.8127 3.8147 6.6723 1.9351 4.9898 5.9036 4.7666 4.2762 4.5214 0.8971

    From DESeq2_out:
    Locus Basemean Log2foldchange P value Fold change
    2R_188654 4.1884 -0.3108 0.4093 0.8062
    2R_188736 4.5214 -0.0819 0.8279 0.9448

    As you can see, the basemeans (mean of control and treated counts) match- which tells me there is no internal error- but the fold changes do not. Why is this???
  • dpryan
    Devon Ryan
    • Jul 2011
    • 3478

    #2
    Fold-changes are shrunken, so they won't match what you calculate by hand (the shrinkage produces more reliable results). If you want the number that will more or less match what you're calculating them have it output the MLE results (use "addMLE=T" in results()).

    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...