SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Bioinformatics > Bioinformatics



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DESeq Multi-factor designs: determining the significance of model terms DJParker Bioinformatics 8 07-21-2014 02:21 PM
Tophat - reporting only best hit given multi-reads/multi-maps. john_nl Bioinformatics 1 07-05-2012 12:15 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-26-2013, 05:11 PM   #1
alittleboy
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 60
Default DEXSeq for multi-factor design

I am using DEXSeq for testing differential exon usage between two conditions: control and treatment. For each condition, I have 8 biological replicates (C1-C8, and T1-T8). The design is listed below.

condition subject
C1 control 1
C2 control 2
C3 control 3
C4 control 4
C5 control 5
C6 control 6
C7 control 7
C8 control 8
T1 treatment 1
T2 treatment 2
T3 treatment 3
T4 treatment 4
T5 treatment 5
T6 treatment 6
T7 treatment 7
T8 treatment 8


As you can see from the last column, we have 8 subjects involved in the experiment. Subject 1 has both the control and the treatment, and so on for all the other subjects. This is different from the situation discussed in the DEXSeq vignette here, for example:

design(pasillaExons)

gives:

condition type
treated1fb treated single-read
treated2fb treated paired-end
treated3fb treated paired-end
untreated1fb untreated single-read
untreated2fb untreated single-read
untreated3fb untreated paired-end
untreated4fb untreated paired-end


I think in the pasilla example, the biological replicates are all different. Thus in my situation, in order to see if there is differential exon usage between the treatment and control, can I do:

(1) ignore the fact that each subject had both control and treatment? In this case, in my implementation, shall I write:

f_dispersion = count ~ sample + condition * exon
pExons = estimateDispersions(pExons, formula=f_dispersion)
pExons = fitDispersionFunction(pExons)
Null model: f_0 = count ~ sample + condition
Alternative model: f_1 = count ~ sample + condition * I(exon == exonID)
pExons = testForDEU(pExons, formula0 = f_0, formula1 = f_1)


(2) incorporate the subject as a corvariate (coded that column as a factor), and then analyze in the GLM framework? In this case, in my implementation, shall I write:

f_dispersion = count ~ sample + (condition + subject) * exon
Null model: f_0 = count ~ sample + subject * exon + condition
Alternative model: f_1 = count ~ sample + subject * exon + condition * I(exon == exonID)


(3) I am not sure if including subject as a corvariate is the best approach in my situation. Are there any other options that I can consider?

(4) I write the formula for null and alternative models exactly according to the vignette, but I am not sure if they are what I should put in R implementation.

Thank you so much ;-)

Last edited by alittleboy; 06-26-2013 at 05:16 PM.
alittleboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 01:08 AM   #2
dpryan
Devon Ryan
 
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,480
Default

You'll want option (2). This happened to be recently discussed on the bioconductor email list, so have a look at that thread.
dpryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 04:08 AM   #3
alittleboy
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 60
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dpryan View Post
You'll want option (2). This happened to be recently discussed on the bioconductor email list, so have a look at that thread.
Hi @dpryan:

That's a really relevant post, and it's convenient to include the subject effect in the GLM setting ;-)

Can I know if, according to my design matrix above, the following formula are correct?

f_dispersion = count ~ sample + (condition + subject) * exon
Null model: f_0 = count ~ sample + subject * exon + condition
Alternative model: f_1 = count ~ sample + subject * exon + condition * I(exon == exonID)

Thanks!
alittleboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 04:24 AM   #4
dpryan
Devon Ryan
 
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,480
Default

By my understanding, yes. Hopefully someone else will jump in if my understanding is wrong!
dpryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 09:28 AM   #5
alittleboy
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 60
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dpryan View Post
By my understanding, yes. Hopefully someone else will jump in if my understanding is wrong!
Hi @dpryan:

According to this post (pretty recent!): the formula I wrote should be correct for the dispersion and testDEU ;-)

Thanks!
alittleboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 09:43 AM   #6
dpryan
Devon Ryan
 
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,480
Default

Confirmation is always good
dpryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
design, dexseq

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 11:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO