[BioC] [DESeq] p-value vs adjusted p-value
cittaro.davide at hsr.it
Thu Jun 6 13:44:27 CEST 2013
On Jun 5, 2013, at 8:56 PM, Simon Anders <anders at embl.de> wrote:
> On 05/06/13 17:06, lucia kwak wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Thank you for your answer. I've used method=blind to estimate the
>> dispersions in DESeq. For the comparison of tools, I am using different
>> p-value cutoff for two packages making the similar subset size of
>> significant genes. The adjusted p-value in edgeR is much lower than the
>> p-value used in DESeq. But if I use the adjusted p-value in DESeq also, it
>> is hard to find the differentially expressed genes, while the edgeR shows
>> many significant genes.
> I am getting confused here. I sounds as if at some point you are
> comparing raw p values from one tool with adjusted p value from the
> other tool. This would make no sense at all.
I think Lucia is doing like this:
use DESeq -> not many significant genes under FDR < 0.05 -> use nominal p-value to get some more genes. Use edgeR -> more genes under FDR <0.05 -> keep edgeR genes. Well, at least I've seen people doing this.
> I do remember that edgeR can somehow be switched to a "Poisson
> mode" in case of no replicates, where the dispersion is set to zero.
> Long ago, this was the default, but this is (reasonably) no longer the
> case, I think.
Actually there's a new approach but the manual says that if you do not have replicates it would be better to stop after you plotted some MDS to describe relationships among samples.
> Maybe post the code you used.
> Bioconductor mailing list
> Bioconductor at r-project.org
> Search the archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.science.biology.informatics.conductor
Davide Cittaro, PhD
Coordinator of Bioinformatics Core
Center for Translational Genomics and Bioinformatics
Ospedale San Raffaele
Via Olgettina 58
Office: +39 02 26439211
Mail: cittaro.davide at hsr.it
More information about the Bioconductor