On the performance of methods for finding a switching mechanism in gene expression.

Mitsunori Kayano, Ichigaku Takigawa, Motoki Shiga, K. Tsuda, Hiroshi Mamitsuka
{"title":"On the performance of methods for finding a switching mechanism in gene expression.","authors":"Mitsunori Kayano, Ichigaku Takigawa, Motoki Shiga, K. Tsuda, Hiroshi Mamitsuka","doi":"10.1142/9781848166585_0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We address an issue of detecting a switching mechanism in gene expression, where two genes are positively correlated for one experimental condition while they are negatively correlated for another. We compare the performance of existing methods for this issue, roughly divided into two types: interaction test (IT) and the difference of correlation coefficients. Interaction test, currently a standard approach for detecting epistasis in genetics, is the log-likelihood ratio test between two logistic regressions with/without an interaction term, resulting in checking the strength of interaction between two genes. On the other hand, two correlation coefficients can be computed for two experimental conditions and the difference of them shows the alteration of expression trends in a more straightforward manner. In our experiments, we tested three different types of correlation coefficients: Pearson, Spearman and a midcorrelation (biweight midcorrelation). The experiment was performed by using ~ 2.3 × 10(9) combinations selected out of the GEO (Gene Expression Omnibus) database. We sorted all combinations according to the p-values of IT or by the absolute values of the difference of correlation coefficients and then visually evaluated the top ranked combinations in terms of the switching mechanism. The result showed that 1) combinations detected by IT included non-switching combinations and 2) Pearson was affected by outliers easily while Spearman and the midcorrelation seemed likely to avoid them.","PeriodicalId":73143,"journal":{"name":"Genome informatics. International Conference on Genome Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genome informatics. International Conference on Genome Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1142/9781848166585_0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

We address an issue of detecting a switching mechanism in gene expression, where two genes are positively correlated for one experimental condition while they are negatively correlated for another. We compare the performance of existing methods for this issue, roughly divided into two types: interaction test (IT) and the difference of correlation coefficients. Interaction test, currently a standard approach for detecting epistasis in genetics, is the log-likelihood ratio test between two logistic regressions with/without an interaction term, resulting in checking the strength of interaction between two genes. On the other hand, two correlation coefficients can be computed for two experimental conditions and the difference of them shows the alteration of expression trends in a more straightforward manner. In our experiments, we tested three different types of correlation coefficients: Pearson, Spearman and a midcorrelation (biweight midcorrelation). The experiment was performed by using ~ 2.3 × 10(9) combinations selected out of the GEO (Gene Expression Omnibus) database. We sorted all combinations according to the p-values of IT or by the absolute values of the difference of correlation coefficients and then visually evaluated the top ranked combinations in terms of the switching mechanism. The result showed that 1) combinations detected by IT included non-switching combinations and 2) Pearson was affected by outliers easily while Spearman and the midcorrelation seemed likely to avoid them.
关于寻找基因表达转换机制的方法的性能。
我们解决了检测基因表达开关机制的问题,其中两个基因在一个实验条件下正相关,而在另一个实验条件下负相关。我们比较了现有方法对该问题的性能,大致分为两种类型:交互测试(IT)和相关系数的差异。相互作用检验是目前遗传学中检测上位性的标准方法,它是在两个有或没有相互作用项的逻辑回归之间进行对数似然比检验,从而检查两个基因之间相互作用的强度。另一方面,两种实验条件下可以计算出两个相关系数,它们之间的差异更直观地反映了表达趋势的变化。在我们的实验中,我们测试了三种不同类型的相关系数:Pearson、Spearman和中相关(双权重中相关)。实验采用从GEO (Gene Expression Omnibus)数据库中选择的约2.3 × 10(9)个组合进行。我们根据IT的p值或相关系数差的绝对值对所有组合进行排序,然后根据切换机制直观地评估排名靠前的组合。结果表明:1)IT检测到的组合包括非切换组合;2)Pearson容易受到异常值的影响,而Spearman和中相关则可能避免异常值的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信