Re: edgeR, very big lib.size makes CPM very small
Vang Quy Le / Region Nordjylland <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.science.biology.informatics.conductor |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Thank you for the confirmation, Gordon. Even though it might be a small thing, but very assuring for me to know. Best regards Vang On 15 Aug 2014, at 03:04, Gordon K Smyth <smyth-QpO9qclcJEu6c6uEtOJ/[email protected]<mailto:smyth-QpO9qclcJEu6c6uEtOJ/[email protected]>> wrote: Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 13:37:23 +0000 From: Vang Quy Le / Region Nordjylland <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [BioC] edgeR, very big lib.size makes CPM very small Hello, I am working with count table that has very big lib.size: [email protected][[2]]$lib.size [1] 3.2e+08 4.2e+08 4.5e+08 3.8e+08 2.3e+08 2.1e+08 3.3e+08 2.8e+08 This causes CPM very small, and consequently very negative logCPM. This is 'head' of my cpm(counts): C1 C2 C3 C4 T1 T2 T3 T4 00000001 0.000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0026 0.0042 0.000 0.000 0.0035 00000002 0.012 0.0092 0.0086 0.0103 0.0042 0.014 0.006 0.0070 00000003 0.073 0.0554 0.0474 0.0620 0.0584 0.056 0.057 0.0525 00000004 0.073 0.0624 0.0496 0.0620 0.0626 0.056 0.060 0.0525 00000005 0.076 0.0624 0.0496 0.0594 0.0584 0.056 0.060 0.0490 00000006 0.067 0.0624 0.0474 0.0620 0.0584 0.046 0.066 0.0630 The point that concerns me here is the effect number of decimal places and rounding of numbers may lose sensitivity. No, not unless you are planning to run R on a 1960's calculator without floating point arithmetic. Is this something that can effect the outcome of analysis? No. Modern computers with floating point arithmetic have no trouble with trivial issues like this. Floating point arithmetic means that numbers are not rounded to any fixed number of decimal places. Rather, all numbers are stored to the same number of significant figures regardless of their absolute size. If it does, should I just scale the counts up before putting the data through my workflow? No, you should not falsify the true nature of your data to edgeR. Gordon ##### body of 'cpm' function/method ####### { x <- as.matrix(x) if (is.null(lib.size)) lib.size <- colSums(x) if (log) { prior.count.scaled <- lib.size/mean(lib.size) * prior.count lib.size <- lib.size + 2 * prior.count.scaled } lib.size <- 1e-06 * lib.size if (log) log2(t((t(x) + prior.count.scaled)/lib.size)) else t(t(x)/lib.size) } Kind regards, Vang Quy Le Bioinformatician, Molecular Biologist, PhD +45 97 66 56 29 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> AALBORG UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL Section for Molecular Diagnostics, Clinical Biochemistry Reberbansgade DK 9000 Aalborg www.aalborguh.rn.dk ______________________________________________________________________ The information in this email is confidential and intend...{{dropped:22}} _______________________________________________ Bioconductor mailing list [email protected] https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor Search the archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.science.biology.informatics.conductor