SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Bioinformatics > Bioinformatics



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Different fpkm values for cuffdiff and cuffcompare madsaan Bioinformatics 3 12-12-2012 04:14 PM
Different FPKM values of cufflinks and cuffdiff mrfox Bioinformatics 5 10-17-2012 01:10 PM
cufflinks-1.0.3 produces very high FPKM values when compared to cufflinks-0.9.3. Why? pinki999 Bioinformatics 5 06-09-2012 06:48 AM
Cuffdiff and zero FPKM values give enormous log ratio altodor Bioinformatics 2 04-15-2011 08:01 AM
Different FPKM values of cufflinks and cuffdiff in latest version mrfox Bioinformatics 1 11-23-2010 05:23 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-05-2010, 09:51 AM   #1
combiochem
Member
 
Location: Los Angeles

Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 11
Default Cufflinks and cuffdiff FPKM values

I have questions about the FPKM values in each program.
As I understand, the cufflinks or cuffdiff are counting the reads based on the gene structures, when the known annotations are provided. And FPKM value is a kind of absolute value for each transcript. In that case, can we expect the same FPKM value for the same sample, from each program, cuffdiff and cufflinks? or Is my understating not right?

I tried two programs with same mapping results and same a known annotation file, but the FPKM values are different each other (from transcripts.expr and isoforms.fpkm_tracking files) Is cuffdiff differently estimating the expression of the transcript (FPKM) because of other sample?

Thanks for any comments in advance.
combiochem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 05:02 PM   #2
thinkRNA
Member
 
Location: Carlsbad,CA

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 94
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by combiochem View Post
I have questions about the FPKM values in each program.
As I understand, the cufflinks or cuffdiff are counting the reads based on the gene structures, when the known annotations are provided. And FPKM value is a kind of absolute value for each transcript. In that case, can we expect the same FPKM value for the same sample, from each program, cuffdiff and cufflinks? or Is my understating not right?

I tried two programs with same mapping results and same a known annotation file, but the FPKM values are different each other (from transcripts.expr and isoforms.fpkm_tracking files) Is cuffdiff differently estimating the expression of the transcript (FPKM) because of other sample?

Thanks for any comments in advance.
I think cuffdiff uses a likelihood function to estimate FPKM which is not an absolute value (Read this thread: http://seqanswers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3961)
Which other program did you compare it with? If this other program is not using the same methodology, you will not get the same answer.
thinkRNA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2010, 05:16 PM   #3
combiochem
Member
 
Location: Los Angeles

Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkRNA View Post
I think cuffdiff uses a likelihood function to estimate FPKM which is not an absolute value (Read this thread: http://seqanswers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3961)
Which other program did you compare it with? If this other program is not using the same methodology, you will not get the same answer.
No, I'm not comparing the FPKM values from "other" program. I've compared the FPKM between cufflinks output and cuffdiff output. As far as I know, in cufflinks, when the known annotations are given, the FPKM for each transcript can be obtained (in one sample). Also in cuffdiff tracking file, the FPKM in each sample (q0 and q1) can be obtained. I've used exactly same annotations and mapping results (which have used for cufflinks) for cuffdiff running (therefore the read counts for each transcript should be same), but the FPKM outputs are different from cufflinks. I'm wondering whether the estimation is taking care of both samples in cuffdiff (which is different from cufflinks?) rather than each sample (q0 or q1).
combiochem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2010, 08:57 PM   #4
mrfox
Senior Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 103
Default

i actually went through the cufflinks-cuffcompare-cuffdiff pipeline and I also have the same problems. cufflinks and cuffdiff report different FPKM values for a same transcript.
mrfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2010, 04:00 AM   #5
Thomas Doktor
Senior Member
 
Location: University of Southern Denmark (SDU), Denmark

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 105
Default

EDIT
My question was answered in another thread.

Last edited by Thomas Doktor; 11-23-2010 at 04:02 AM. Reason: Question already answered
Thomas Doktor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2011, 07:47 AM   #6
lewewoo
Member
 
Location: Moon

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 60
Default

Where I can find it? Please post the link, thanks!
lewewoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2011, 07:51 AM   #7
mrfox
Senior Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 103
Default

Please download the latest Cufflinks from the link below. I think now cufflinks and cuffdiff return consistent values.

http://cufflinks.cbcb.umd.edu/manual.html
mrfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2011, 05:02 AM   #8
reut
Member
 
Location: Israel

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 19
Default same problem with the latest Cufflinks version

I am using cufflinks version 1.0.2 and have the same problem.
Any suggestions?
reut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2011, 05:27 AM   #9
Thomas Doktor
Senior Member
 
Location: University of Southern Denmark (SDU), Denmark

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 105
Default

This might explain it:
Quote:
Cuffdiff and Cufflinks now accept new options controlling whether all hits are counted towards the FPKM denominator, or only those compatible with some transcript in the reference annotation. Counting only compatible hits avoids certain types of bias that arise when one sample contains far more hits that aren't compatible with any transcript than the other sample does. For example, if one sample contains vastly more mapped ribosomal RNA hits, FPKM values will appear lower in that sample, potentially leading to false positive differential expression calls. Cuffdiff by default now uses only compatible hits. Cufflinks still uses total hits by default, as using compatible hit accounting requires a reference GTF.
Thomas Doktor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 11:00 AM   #10
arrchi
Member
 
Location: ma

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 46
Default

Have anyone also seen that some isoforms exist in the files generated by Cufflinks but disappear in the files generated by Cuffcompare and Cuffdiff?
arrchi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2011, 08:10 AM   #11
lewewoo
Member
 
Location: Moon

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 60
Default cufflinks or cuffcompare bugs?

1. New released 1.3.0, after Cuffcompare, FPKM column contains all 0, missing FPKM values even tracking files have them;

2. in all the versions of CuffDiff, if you compare different conditions against the same control samples, the FPKM in the same control samples in different comparing is different; for example,
CuffDiff I: condition 1 v.s. condition control;
CuffDiff II: condition 2 v.s condition control;

after CuffDiff, when FPKM numbers are tracked, the FPKM of Gene X in condition control in CuffDiff I is different from the FPKM of Gene X in condition control in CuffDiff II. GeneX roughly are 20-30% in total annotated genes and the rest are the same.
anybody has explanation or suggestions for this? Thanks!
lewewoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2011, 10:05 PM   #12
tangx_2010
Junior Member
 
Location: china

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lewewoo View Post
after CuffDiff, when FPKM numbers are tracked, the FPKM of Gene X in condition control in CuffDiff I is different from the FPKM of Gene X in condition control in CuffDiff II. GeneX roughly are 20-30% in total annotated genes and the rest are the same.
anybody has explanation or suggestions for this? Thanks!
Did you use the "-N" option? I found that FPKM are different when I used "-N" option. And FPKM is consistent between different comparison when I closed "-N" option.
tangx_2010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2012, 11:37 PM   #13
IBseq
Member
 
Location: uk

Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 56
Default

hi tangx 2010,
i have used cuffdiff on the galaxy platform...what exaclty is the N option?

how can i select/deselect this option?

thanks,ib
IBseq is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO