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
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.