Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Questionable diagnostic plots from Cummerbund/DESeq2

    Hi everyone,

    I'm analyzing some RNA-seq data for a colleague and some of the results/diagnostic plots have raised some caution flags in my mind. I'll include the code I used to avoid going back and forth. Cliffnotes: Getting a large number of differentially expressed genes (which may or may not be normal?), large log2FCs, and diagnostic plots don't quite look typical.

    Experimental Design:
    RNA-seq before and after inducing differentiation(GNP -> GC). Two biological replicates for each condition.

    Alignment & Counts (done for each of the four samples):
    Code:
    tophat -p 8 -G Mus.musculus.NCBIM37.65.gtf -o tophat_dir --no-novel-juncs mm9 GC2_R1.fastq GC2_R2.fastq
    samtools sort -n accepted_hits.bam sorted.GC2
    htseq-count -f bam sorted.GC2 Mus.musculus.NCBIM37.65.norRNA.gtf > GC2.counts.txt ##annotation lacks rRNA just in case
    I then used DESeqDataSetFromHTSeqCount to get the summary and files set up:
    Code:
    sampleName        fileName condition
    1  GC2.counts.txt  GC2.counts.txt        GC
    2  GC3.counts.txt  GC3.counts.txt        GC
    3 GNP2.counts.txt GNP2.counts.txt       GNP
    4 GNP3.counts.txt GNP3.counts.txt       GNP
    
    > dds
    class: DESeqDataSet 
    dim: 37651 4 
    exptData(0):
    assays(3): counts mu cooks
    rownames(37651): ENSMUSG00000000001 ENSMUSG00000000003 ... ENSMUSG00000093788
      ENSMUSG00000093789
    rowData metadata column names(27): baseMean baseVar ... deviance maxCooks
    colnames(4): GC2.counts.txt GC3.counts.txt GNP2.counts.txt GNP3.counts.txt
    colData names(2): condition sizeFactor
    Ran DESeq and checked results:
    Code:
    dds <- DESeq(dds)
    res <- results(dds)
    
    > summary(res)
    
    out of 24178 with nonzero total read count
    adjusted p-value < 0.1
    LFC > 0 (up)     : 5752, 24%  ##~1000 LFC > 2
    LFC < 0 (down)   : 5786, 24% ##~1000 LFC < 2
    outliers [1]     : 0, 0% 
    low counts [2]   : 4687, 19% 
    (mean count < 1.7)
    [1] see 'cooksCutoff' argument of ?results
    [2] see 'independentFiltering' argument of ?results
    
    ##MA plot
    plotMA(res, main="DESeq2", ylim=c(-10,10)) ##Large number of significant genes with high mean exp value
    
    ##P value dist.
    hist(res$pval, breaks=100) ##Very few genes with high p-value (looks similar with padj)
    
    ##Dispersion plot
    plotDispEsts(dds) ##Not really sure if there's anything strange here
    
    ##Per gene standard deviation plots
    #Script exactly as presented in DESeq2 vignette: shifted logarithm log2(n + 1) (left), the regularized log transformation(center), and the variance stabilizing transformation (right)
    #Some really high SDs
    
    ##Euclidian distances
    distsRL <- dist(t(assay(rld)))
    What's reassuring is that the differentially expressed genes are enriched for relevant GO terms, but the plots are just looking different from others I have seen. Could anyone shed some light on whether there is anything to be alarmed about?

    EDIT: Just realized I mentioned cuffdiff/cummeRbund in the title but didn't include anything from it. Volcano plot from there showed results consistent with the MA plot here.

    David Cook
    MSc. Candidate, University of OTtawa
    Attached Files
    Last edited by DPCook; 03-12-2015, 08:57 AM. Reason: Deceiving title, sorry

  • #2
    PCA plot is also nice for seeing sample distances. From the distplot these conditions look very distinct. Why don't you consider testing at a higher threshold than |LFC| > 0, as this seems to be achieved by many genes? See the lfcThreshold argument of ?results. The reasoning is described in the "Specifying minimum effect size" section of the paper.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks for the reply Michael. I adjusted the lfc threshold and it certainly made the list a bit more manageable (LFC > 1.5, FDR=0.05 yielded about 800 DEGs in both directions). I guess I just wasn't expecting such large differences between the two conditions and was concerned that I was missing some obvious artefact that could cause it.

      I also ran the PCA following regularize log transformation to look at distances. PC1 is apparently capturing 100% variance and splits the two conditions. I'm no expert, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I suppose this supports that idea that the results are just the product of very distinct conditions because the variability between biological replicates is negligible (at least relative to the differences between conditions).

      Thanks!
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks for sharing. We provide full support for all your Arlo devices, including guidance for your netgear extender setup . So if you are having issues with connecting to the Wifi or configure settings on the Arlo app, then contact us using our live chat services or our email. You can also call us using our customer support phone number.

        Comment

        Latest Articles

        Collapse

        • seqadmin
          Strategies for Sequencing Challenging Samples
          by seqadmin


          Despite advancements in sequencing platforms and related sample preparation technologies, certain sample types continue to present significant challenges that can compromise sequencing results. Pedro Echave, Senior Manager of the Global Business Segment at Revvity, explained that the success of a sequencing experiment ultimately depends on the amount and integrity of the nucleic acid template (RNA or DNA) obtained from a sample. “The better the quality of the nucleic acid isolated...
          03-22-2024, 06:39 AM
        • seqadmin
          Techniques and Challenges in Conservation Genomics
          by seqadmin



          The field of conservation genomics centers on applying genomics technologies in support of conservation efforts and the preservation of biodiversity. This article features interviews with two researchers who showcase their innovative work and highlight the current state and future of conservation genomics.

          Avian Conservation
          Matthew DeSaix, a recent doctoral graduate from Kristen Ruegg’s lab at The University of Colorado, shared that most of his research...
          03-08-2024, 10:41 AM

        ad_right_rmr

        Collapse

        News

        Collapse

        Topics Statistics Last Post
        Started by seqadmin, Yesterday, 06:37 PM
        0 responses
        10 views
        0 likes
        Last Post seqadmin  
        Started by seqadmin, Yesterday, 06:07 PM
        0 responses
        9 views
        0 likes
        Last Post seqadmin  
        Started by seqadmin, 03-22-2024, 10:03 AM
        0 responses
        51 views
        0 likes
        Last Post seqadmin  
        Started by seqadmin, 03-21-2024, 07:32 AM
        0 responses
        67 views
        0 likes
        Last Post seqadmin  
        Working...
        X