A comparative study of techniques for differential expression analysis on RNA-Seq data.

Recent advances in next-generation sequencing technology allow high-throughput cDNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) to be widely applied in transcriptomic studies, in particular for detecting differentially expressed genes between groups. Many software packages have been developed for the identification of dif...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zong Hong Zhang, Dhanisha J Jhaveri, Vikki M Marshall, Denis C Bauer, Janette Edson, Ramesh K Narayanan, Gregory J Robinson, Andreas E Lundberg, Perry F Bartlett, Naomi R Wray, Qiong-Yi Zhao
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/25119138/pdf/?tool=EBI
id doaj-93e22399e43e472783d6cdbce44a4fb3
record_format Article
spelling doaj-93e22399e43e472783d6cdbce44a4fb32021-03-04T09:08:34ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0198e10320710.1371/journal.pone.0103207A comparative study of techniques for differential expression analysis on RNA-Seq data.Zong Hong ZhangDhanisha J JhaveriVikki M MarshallDenis C BauerJanette EdsonRamesh K NarayananGregory J RobinsonAndreas E LundbergPerry F BartlettNaomi R WrayQiong-Yi ZhaoRecent advances in next-generation sequencing technology allow high-throughput cDNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) to be widely applied in transcriptomic studies, in particular for detecting differentially expressed genes between groups. Many software packages have been developed for the identification of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between treatment groups based on RNA-Seq data. However, there is a lack of consensus on how to approach an optimal study design and choice of suitable software for the analysis. In this comparative study we evaluate the performance of three of the most frequently used software tools: Cufflinks-Cuffdiff2, DESeq and edgeR. A number of important parameters of RNA-Seq technology were taken into consideration, including the number of replicates, sequencing depth, and balanced vs. unbalanced sequencing depth within and between groups. We benchmarked results relative to sets of DEGs identified through either quantitative RT-PCR or microarray. We observed that edgeR performs slightly better than DESeq and Cuffdiff2 in terms of the ability to uncover true positives. Overall, DESeq or taking the intersection of DEGs from two or more tools is recommended if the number of false positives is a major concern in the study. In other circumstances, edgeR is slightly preferable for differential expression analysis at the expense of potentially introducing more false positives.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/25119138/pdf/?tool=EBI
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Zong Hong Zhang
Dhanisha J Jhaveri
Vikki M Marshall
Denis C Bauer
Janette Edson
Ramesh K Narayanan
Gregory J Robinson
Andreas E Lundberg
Perry F Bartlett
Naomi R Wray
Qiong-Yi Zhao
spellingShingle Zong Hong Zhang
Dhanisha J Jhaveri
Vikki M Marshall
Denis C Bauer
Janette Edson
Ramesh K Narayanan
Gregory J Robinson
Andreas E Lundberg
Perry F Bartlett
Naomi R Wray
Qiong-Yi Zhao
A comparative study of techniques for differential expression analysis on RNA-Seq data.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Zong Hong Zhang
Dhanisha J Jhaveri
Vikki M Marshall
Denis C Bauer
Janette Edson
Ramesh K Narayanan
Gregory J Robinson
Andreas E Lundberg
Perry F Bartlett
Naomi R Wray
Qiong-Yi Zhao
author_sort Zong Hong Zhang
title A comparative study of techniques for differential expression analysis on RNA-Seq data.
title_short A comparative study of techniques for differential expression analysis on RNA-Seq data.
title_full A comparative study of techniques for differential expression analysis on RNA-Seq data.
title_fullStr A comparative study of techniques for differential expression analysis on RNA-Seq data.
title_full_unstemmed A comparative study of techniques for differential expression analysis on RNA-Seq data.
title_sort comparative study of techniques for differential expression analysis on rna-seq data.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2014-01-01
description Recent advances in next-generation sequencing technology allow high-throughput cDNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) to be widely applied in transcriptomic studies, in particular for detecting differentially expressed genes between groups. Many software packages have been developed for the identification of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between treatment groups based on RNA-Seq data. However, there is a lack of consensus on how to approach an optimal study design and choice of suitable software for the analysis. In this comparative study we evaluate the performance of three of the most frequently used software tools: Cufflinks-Cuffdiff2, DESeq and edgeR. A number of important parameters of RNA-Seq technology were taken into consideration, including the number of replicates, sequencing depth, and balanced vs. unbalanced sequencing depth within and between groups. We benchmarked results relative to sets of DEGs identified through either quantitative RT-PCR or microarray. We observed that edgeR performs slightly better than DESeq and Cuffdiff2 in terms of the ability to uncover true positives. Overall, DESeq or taking the intersection of DEGs from two or more tools is recommended if the number of false positives is a major concern in the study. In other circumstances, edgeR is slightly preferable for differential expression analysis at the expense of potentially introducing more false positives.
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/25119138/pdf/?tool=EBI
work_keys_str_mv AT zonghongzhang acomparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT dhanishajjhaveri acomparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT vikkimmarshall acomparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT deniscbauer acomparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT janetteedson acomparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT rameshknarayanan acomparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT gregoryjrobinson acomparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT andreaselundberg acomparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT perryfbartlett acomparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT naomirwray acomparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT qiongyizhao acomparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT zonghongzhang comparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT dhanishajjhaveri comparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT vikkimmarshall comparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT deniscbauer comparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT janetteedson comparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT rameshknarayanan comparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT gregoryjrobinson comparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT andreaselundberg comparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT perryfbartlett comparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT naomirwray comparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
AT qiongyizhao comparativestudyoftechniquesfordifferentialexpressionanalysisonrnaseqdata
_version_ 1714807454387142656