Hello all, please excuse this rather naïve question but why should I use an RNA-SEQ specific application (such as edgeR, DESeq, etc.) on counts rather than a simple t-test on FPKM or RPKM values? I've seen many papers comparing the performance of different RNA-SEQ specific applications but I don't recall seeing any compared to a simple t-test. I presume there would be a breakdown of reliability at extreme values but has anyone seen an actual analysis? Thanks.
-
-
Have a read through the original limma paper. This was for microarrays, but the point is the same. Also, make sure you create you FPKMs/RPKMs from normalized values rather than using the classical FPKM/RPKM formulas. That latter are well known to be unreliable (not to mention that you lose precision when you convert to FPKM/RPKM). -
For a comparison that includes the t-test, see the voom paper at
As expected, the t-test does very poorly compared to the best of the RNA-seq specific methods.Comment
-
CRISPR/Cas9 sparked the gene editing revolution for both research and therapeutics.1 But this system still showed severe issues that limited its applications. The most prominent were the heavy reliance on PAM sequences, delivery limitations, double-stranded breaks that prompt unintended edits and cell death, and editing inefficiency (both in targeting and in knock-in reliability).
Despite this, “CRISPR helped turn genome editing from a specialized technique into...07-31-2026, 11:01 AM -
Proteomics platforms are evolving rapidly, with advances in mass spectrometry and affinity-based approaches expanding what researchers can detect and at what scale. As the field moves toward deeper proteome coverage and clinical applications, scientists face an increasingly complex landscape of tools. This article will explore how researchers are navigating these choices to find the right platform for their work.
The systematic characterization of the human proteome has...07-20-2026, 11:48 AM
Comment