Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Welmu
    Junior Member
    • Apr 2013
    • 1

    DESeq2: rows did not converge in beta

    I'm trying to run a rather complicated model in DESeq2 with 16S microbiome data. More specifically, the model is "~ confounder + diseaseStatus:subject + timepoint*diseaseStatus" (a two-timepoint case-control comparison, with the same subjects at both timepoints; all variables are factors, except for the confounder, which is numeric). Probably because of how complicated this is, I keep running into the "rows did not converge in beta, labelled in mcols(object)$betaConv. Use larger maxit argument with nbinomWaldTest" issue. Now, this wouldn't be such a big problem otherwise, but many of the rows that don't converge in beta represent microbial taxa that I am very much interested in, and would like to have results for.

    First of all, the output still includes a full set of results, complete with p-values, for the rows that were labeled as non-converging. Are these good for anything, or should I just ignore them completely? Some old discussions I found on this topic suggest deleting all the non-converging rows from the output. The DESeq2 documentation mentions a useOptim parameter, "whether to use the native optim function on rows which do not converge within maxit", for nbinomWaldTest, which is by default TRUE, and I assume is relevant to what's going on here, but I don't really understand what this means.

    Secondly, is there any way to get around this issue? I've looked at everything google/earlier conversations suggest as solutions for this, which mostly comes down to trimming the data and increasing the maxit value for nbinomWaldTest. I've tried both, and neither trimming the data aggressively nor increasing the maxit several orders of magnitude (from the default 100 all the way to 1 000 000) help lower the number of non-converging rows. I'd be extremely thankful for any additional ideas that might help.

    (I guess it might come down to "run a simpler model". I'm just fond of running it as one comparison using all the samples at once, instead of subsetting it by timepoint or some such.)

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
8 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
0 responses
12 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
0 responses
20 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...