Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • fcchau
    Junior Member
    • Feb 2017
    • 1

    #1

    Very large FPKM from cuffdiff that doesn't match read counts

    Hi Everyone,

    I am relatively new to RNAseq, and hope can get some help from more experienced people here.

    So I used cuffdiff to look at differential gene expression. I have 2 conditions and 3 replicates for each condition. When I look at the genes_read_group_tracking file, I found that for some genes, one of the replicates has very large FPKM values that doesn't match raw frags count.

    For example this is what I see:

    tracking_id condition replicate raw_frags internal_scaled_frags external_scaled_frags FPKM effective_length status
    XLOC_009487 WT 0 4 4.21548 4.21548 1150.43 - OK
    XLOC_009487 WT 1 5 5.39083 5.39083 1.14629 - OK
    XLOC_009487 WT 2 8 7.56804 7.56804 1.60234 - OK
    XLOC_009487 OE 1 2 2.29124 2.29124 0.476229 - OK
    XLOC_009487 OE 0 5 4.84785 4.84785 0.995213 - OK
    XLOC_009487 OE 2 5 4.07315 4.07315 0.77989 - OK

    You can see that the FPKM for WT 0 is 1150 where as the raw frags is only 4.2. The other samples are fine. I observed this in multiple genes, and they don't always happen to the same sample. I also check the FPKMs from cufflinks, and they look normal. So seems that it's cuffdiff's problem.

    Does anyone know why this happen and how to solve it? Appreciate the help!
  • fanli
    Senior Member
    • Jul 2014
    • 197

    #2
    I think there is a decent amount of evidence out there that cuffdiff is less than optimal for gene-level DE analysis.

    See:

    Recent advances in next-generation sequencing technology allow high-throughput cDNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) to be widely applied in transcriptomic studies, in particular for detecting differentially expressed genes between groups. Many software packages have been developed for the identification of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between treatment groups based on RNA-Seq data. However, there is a lack of consensus on how to approach an optimal study design and choice of suitable software for the analysis. In this comparative study we evaluate the performance of three of the most frequently used software tools: Cufflinks-Cuffdiff2, DESeq and edgeR. A number of important parameters of RNA-Seq technology were taken into consideration, including the number of replicates, sequencing depth, and balanced vs. unbalanced sequencing depth within and between groups. We benchmarked results relative to sets of DEGs identified through either quantitative RT-PCR or microarray. We observed that edgeR performs slightly better than DESeq and Cuffdiff2 in terms of the ability to uncover true positives. Overall, DESeq or taking the intersection of DEGs from two or more tools is recommended if the number of false positives is a major concern in the study. In other circumstances, edgeR is slightly preferable for differential expression analysis at the expense of potentially introducing more false positives.



    If you are only doing DGE, I'd recommend edgeR or DESeq2

    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
    40 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 10:48 AM
    0 responses
    29 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 10-15-2026, 10:52 AM
    0 responses
    42 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...