Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • quinne5
    Junior Member
    • Mar 2009
    • 5

    DESeq2-test a subset of genes

    Hi,
    I've been using DESeq2 to test for differential expression within my dataset-a simple study design of treatment versus control.

    For a small number of genes in my dataset (10) I have genotype information for my samples (AA,AB,BB) for a known disease-associated SNP located within the given gene and so I was firstly wondering if it would be feasible to use DESeq2 to test if a particular genotype is having any effect on its genes expression? and also Would I have to conduct the analysis on all genes in the dataset or could I subset the genes of interest?

    Thanks for any advice!
  • Michael Love
    Senior Member
    • Jul 2013
    • 333

    #2
    10 genes is probably too small for some of the steps of DESeq(): the estimation of the dispersion trend line for instance.

    One approach would be to estimate the dispersion using the full data set and then recycle these estimates to test the effect of genotype in the 10 genes.

    following your analysis of condition: treatment vs control:

    # if rowIdx gives you the index of the 10 genes
    ddsSub <- dds[rowIdx,]
    design(ddsSub) <- formula(~ condition + genotype)
    ddsSub <- nbinomWaldTest(ddsSub)
    resSub <- results(ddsSub)

    This should be a conservative approach, because the estimate of dispersion using only condition should be larger than an estimation using condition + genotype (because any variation explainable by genotype would be subtracted).

    Another question is what modeling approach for the genotype effect.

    If you encode genotype as a numeric, (0,1,2) then you are assuming if AB doubles expression then would you expect BB to quadruple.

    Another approach would be to encode genotype with two variables, allele1 and allele2, where having allele2 might have a different effect size than allele1. Then you would have:

    design(ddsSub) <- formula(condition + allele1 + allele2)

    hopefully this helps,

    Mike

    Comment

    • Michael Love
      Senior Member
      • Jul 2013
      • 333

      #3
      After discussing with Simon Anders, he pointed out that, while conservative, this approach probably has no power to detect true differences, because in these situations the dispersion will be overestimated.

      With only 10 genes, you might be left to estimate the dispersions per gene only, without shrinking towards a common mean, as you probably don't have a large enough set to get a sense of the distribution of dispersions. This would look like:

      # dds is now the object limited to 10 genes
      design(dds) <- formula(~ condition + genotype)
      dds <- estimateSizeFactors(dds)
      dds <- estimateDispersionsGeneEst(dds)
      dispersions(dds) <- mcols(dds)$dispGeneEst
      dds <- nbinomWaldTest(dds)

      An alternative approach, if you have enough samples, would be to perform permutation tests on the relationship between gene expression and genotype. See section "6.3 Linear regression and estimation of FDR" of the Supplement of the Pickrell eQTL paper: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20220758

      Comment

      Latest Articles

      Collapse

      • SEQadmin2
        Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
        by SEQadmin2


        I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.


        Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
        06-18-2026, 07:11 AM
      • SEQadmin2
        From Collection to Sequencing: Why Sample Preparation and Preservation Define Sequencing Data
        by SEQadmin2


        Data variability is still an issue in sequencing technologies despite the advances in reproducibility and accuracy of these platforms. But the problem does not originate in the sequencing itself, but in the previous steps, before the sample reaches the sequencer.


        The first step is collection, followed by preservation and sample preparation for analysis. Most scientists overlook those steps, but not being careful might just be skewing the experiment’s results.
        ...
        06-02-2026, 10:05 AM

      ad_right_rmr

      Collapse

      News

      Collapse

      Topics Statistics Last Post
      Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
      0 responses
      25 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 06-09-2026, 11:58 AM
      0 responses
      42 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 06-05-2026, 10:09 AM
      0 responses
      48 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 06-04-2026, 08:59 AM
      0 responses
      49 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Working...