SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Bioinformatics > Bioinformatics



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to get normalized count from DESeq? xhuister Bioinformatics 17 10-19-2016 05:37 AM
Count table from BAM file with custom gtf tamari Bioinformatics 3 09-05-2013 02:42 PM
Alternative to cufflinks? - Bam to count table? hbt Bioinformatics 3 11-09-2012 06:09 AM
HTseq count to DESeq (?) ThePresident Bioinformatics 18 09-06-2012 08:12 AM
DESeq input table upload ndeshpan Bioinformatics 2 07-21-2011 03:09 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-07-2013, 08:02 AM   #1
rndouglas
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 23
Default What to include in my count table(s) for DESeq

I have five experimental groups (A, B, C, D, and E; 3-6 bioreps each) that I want to compare to each other and a control (Y; 3 bioreps) using DESeq.

When I run DESeq is it better to use a count table that includes A, B, C, D, E, and Y, then run each comparison, or is it better to make a count table for each comparison (ie: a table for A and Y, another table for B and Y, another table for A and B, etc.) and end up with ~15 different count tables?

I ask because I end up with different lists of significantly changed loci depending on how I run the analysis and I'm not sure which is more 'correct.'
rndouglas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2013, 10:34 AM   #2
feralBiologist
Member
 
Location: UK

Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 61
Default

It is better to have a single count table. This shall lead to increased statistical power. You are likely to get somewhat higher number of differentially expressed genes as DESeq would be able to tease out more signal from the noise.
feralBiologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2013, 10:59 AM   #3
rndouglas
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 23
Default

This is what I had been doing all along (running everything in one count table), but then this morning I thought I'd try A vs. B in a separate count table.

I was surprised to find almost double the loci with padj < 0.05 compared to when I ran everything in one count table (and hence my new-found concern).
rndouglas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2013, 11:17 AM   #4
dpryan
Devon Ryan
 
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,480
Default

Have a look at the size factors. If one of them from the full dataset is very different than the others, that can cause this sort of result.
dpryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2013, 12:14 PM   #5
feralBiologist
Member
 
Location: UK

Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 61
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rndouglas View Post
This is what I had been doing all along (running everything in one count table), but then this morning I thought I'd try A vs. B in a separate count table. I was surprised to find almost double the loci with padj < 0.05 compared to when I ran everything in one count table (and hence my new-found concern).
This is really strange and counter-intuitive. Do you find more loci for all the contrasts? I can imagine this being the case for a small subset of the contrasts where there happens to be less variation within the sample groups but I find it hard to believe that you would get in total a much higher number of differentially expressed features by splitting the count table. What sort of normalisation do you do? Can you give more details about your bioinformatics workflow?
feralBiologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2013, 05:54 AM   #6
rndouglas
Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 23
Default

I just realized I'm only seeing this in my smallRNA libraries (adapter removed, t/rRNA removed, size-selected for 20-25nt in sRNA Workbench).

I map the reads using bowtie (-v 0).

I generate read counts with htseq-count, then build my count table(s).

I run DESeq following along with the vignette section 3.1.

So far, every 1v1 count table I've looked (7 of the possible 15) at has called more significantly changed loci (padj < 0.05) than I get when looking at the exact same comparison using a count table that includes all 30 of my bio-reps.

The biggest 'jump' was from 76 to 372 loci for one comparison.
rndouglas is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
deseq

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 06:13 PM.


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