Re: DESeq: Hypothesis testing in multifactor design
Yanzhu Lin <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.science.biology.informatics.conductor |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAJ27=rx0Oc5QB2mZLCB5fm_i7Opv-JqLLZmaL6yAEgM7AFcFjw@mail.gmail.com> |
Hi Mike, So you mean I need to estimate the dispersions every time when I have a different full model for LRT? In other words, so I need to use estimateDispersions() once when I test the main effect, where the full model is ~A+B+C, and use estimateDispersion() once when I test the three-way interaction term, where the full model is ~A+B+C+A:B+A:C+B:C+A:B:C? One more question about estimateDispersion(), does it take a very long time to estimate the dispersions? I have 16649 features and 726 biosamples, and I run the estimateDispersion function around 9:30 am this morning, and it hasn't done yet. Any suggestion that I can speed up the estimateDispesions(). Your help will be greatly appreciate, thanks. Best, On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Michael Love <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Yanzhu, > > On Aug 20, 2014 3:59 PM, "Yanzhu Lin" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > I am using DESeq2 package for my project now, and I have some questions > regarding to this pacakge. > > > > Please let me briefly introduce some background information about my > project. I have three factors: A with 16 levels, B with 2 levels and C with > 3 levels, in total 16*2*3=96 groups. There are 8 biosamples for each group, > hence 96*8=768 biosamples in total. Due to some issues, we lost some > replicates for some groups, which ends up 726 biosamples, hence it is > unbalance design. > > > > Our purpose are to test the main effects of three factor: A, B and C, > the two-way interaction: A:B, A:C and B:C, and the three-way interaction > term: A:B:C. For example, I will compare full model: ~A+B+C with reduce > model: ~A+B to test factor C, and so on for other two main effects. For > testing three-way interaction A:B:C, I will compare full model: > ~A+B+C+A:B+A:C+B:C+A:B:C and reduced model ~A+B+C+A:B+A:C+B:C. Then come my > questions. > > > > > > I have different full models for testing main effects, two-way > interaction and three-way interaction term. Will the dispersion estimation > affected by my full model? Can I specify the full model when I use > nbinomLRT()? > > No, you should not change the design in between, i.e. don't use a > different design for dispersion estimation and the full model in the LRT. > > Mike > > > In other words, can I use estimateDispersion() only once and fit > nbinomLRT with different full models as below: > > > > > > > dds<-DESeqDataSetFromMatrix(countData=countdata,colData=coldata,design=~A+B+C+A:B+A:C+B:C+A:B:C) > > > > ### normalization > > dds=estimateSizeFactors(dds) > > > > ### dispersion estimation: > > dds=estimateDispersions(dds) > > > > ###Test three-way interaction term. > > dds<-nbinomLRT(dds,reduced=~A+B+C+A:B+A:C+B:C) > > ###Test main effect of factor A: > > dds<-nbinomLRT(dds,full=~A+B+C, reduced=~B+C) > > ###Test main effect of factor B: > > dds<-nbinomLRT(dds,full=~A+B+C, reduced=~A+C) > > > > ###Test main effect of factor C: > > dds<-nbinomLRT(dds,full=~A+B+C, reduced=~A+B) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Yanzhu > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:07 PM, Michael Love < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> hi Yanzhu, > >> > >> Note that we recommend users switch to using DESeq2, which also has > >> the likelihood ratio test you are using, and is faster and more > >> sensitive. > >> > >> The pipeline would look like: > >> > >> DESeq(dds, test="LRT", reduced=~ A+B+C+A:B+A:C+B:C) > >> > >> for your first example. > >> > >> For your question, the terms of the reduced model should be contained > >> within the full model. Still there are a number of models which > >> satisfy this requirement, e.g. for testing B:C, you could use > >> A+B+C+A:B+A:C+B:C and A+B+C+A:B+A:C as full and reduced respectively. > >> Or you could use A+B+C+B:C and A+B+C. The importance of these other > >> interaction terms depends on context, whether they are very > >> explanatory or not. > >> > >> Mike > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:21 AM, yanzhu [guest] < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > Dear Community, > >> > > >> > I have a question about the hypothesis testing of the two-way > interaction terms in a multifactor design which includes three factors: A, > B and C. > >> > > >> > When I tested the three-way interaction I used the full and reduced > models as below for nbinomGLMTest(): > >> > Full: count ~ A+B+C+A:B+A:C+B:C+A:B:C > >> > Reduced: count ~ A+B+C+A:B+A:C+B:C > >> > > >> > Now comes my question, when I want to test the effect of two-way > interaction terms, i.e., A:B, A:C or B:C, what should be my full and > reduced models? For example, when I want to the test the effect of A:B, > what should be my full and reduced models for nbinomGLMTest() using DESeq > pacakge? > >> > > >> > > >> > Best, > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Yanzhu > >> > > >> > > >> > -- output of sessionInfo(): > >> > > >> > sessionInfo() > >> > R version 3.1.0 (2014-04-10) > >> > Platform: x86_64-w64-mingw32/x64 (64-bit) > >> > > >> > locale: > >> > [1] LC_COLLATE=English_United States.1252 LC_CTYPE=English_United > States.1252 LC_MONETARY=English_United States.1252 > >> > [4] LC_NUMERIC=C LC_TIME=English_United > States.1252 > >> > > >> > attached base packages: > >> > [1] parallel stats graphics grDevices utils datasets > methods base > >> > > >> > other attached packages: > >> > [1] DESeq_1.16.0 lattice_0.20-29 locfit_1.5-9.1 > Biobase_2.24.0 BiocGenerics_0.10.0 edgeR_3.6.1 limma_3.20.1 > >> > > >> > loaded via a namespace (and not attached): > >> > [1] annotate_1.42.0 AnnotationDbi_1.26.0 DBI_0.2-7 > genefilter_1.46.0 geneplotter_1.42.0 GenomeInfoDb_1.0.2 > >> > [7] grid_3.1.0 IRanges_1.22.6 MASS_7.3-31 > RColorBrewer_1.0-5 RSQLite_0.11.4 splines_3.1.0 > >> > [13] stats4_3.1.0 survival_2.37-7 tools_3.1.0 > XML_3.98-1.1 xtable_1.7-3 > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Sent via the guest posting facility at bioconductor.org. > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Bioconductor mailing list > >> > [email protected] > >> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor > >> > Search the archives: > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.science.biology.informatics.conductor > > > > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] _______________________________________________ Bioconductor mailing list [email protected] https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor Search the archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.science.biology.informatics.conductor