Different results Limma vs LimmaGUI?
1
0
Entering edit mode
@gordon-smyth
Last seen 1 minute ago
WEHI, Melbourne, Australia
>[BioC] Different results Limma vs LimmaGUI? >J.delasHeras at ed.ac.uk J.delasHeras at ed.ac.uk >Tue Apr 11 16:00:16 CEST 2006 > >Hi, > >I have been using LimmaGUI for a while, and I am starting to use Limma >directly, and I was comparing the results I get with both methods, to >make sure I am doing things right. > >The lists of genes I am getting are roughly the same, but the orders do >change a bit, and so do the B values (that I use to rank the genes). > >Is this expected, perhaps because different limma versions do >calculations in slightly different ways? or is that an indication that >I am not doing the analysis in the same way? > >For LimmaGUI, I use the latest (July 2005), version 1.3.9 (which uses >limma 2.0.2) on R 2.1.1 >Limma, I am using version 2.2.0 with R 2.2.0 (both latest) limma 2.2.0 was the version of limma at the time of last Bioconductor release, but it is not the latest version of limma. Actually limma 2.4.13 is available for R 2.2.0. Please read Section 2.2 (Installation) of the Limma User's Guide for why this is so. >In one experiment (two slides only) I get a B max of 6.33 with limma, >and 6.92 with LimmaGUI. Another 3.13 with limma, and 2.84 with >LimmaGUI. Then I add another 3 slides (5 total now) and the B max >increases to 13.0 in both limma and limmaGUI. So, the differences are >not big... is this due to slight changes in the way successive versions >of limma do certain calculations? >The analysis included: >- bkg correction: substract >- within arrays normalisation: loess print-tip >- between arrays normalisation: scale >- least squares (for linear model) in limmaGUI (default in limma) There is no reason that I know of that should cause limma 2.02 and limma 2.2.0 to give different results for the B-statistic. There was a small change made in limma 2.4.0, and another in limma 2.4.13. You should probably become familiar with the limma change log. Type changeLog(n=280) at the command line, and you'll see an entry for limma 2.4.0 dated 11 Nov 2005. Best wishes Gordon >Thanks for your help, > >Jose > >-- >Dr. Jose I. de las Heras Email: J.delasHeras at ed.ac.uk >The Wellcome Trust Centre for Cell Biology Phone: +44 (0)131 6513374 >Institute for Cell & Molecular Biology Fax: +44 (0)131 6507360 >Swann Building, Mayfield Road >University of Edinburgh >Edinburgh EH9 3JR >UK
limma limmaGUI limma limmaGUI • 445 views
ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode
@jdelasherasedacuk-1189
Last seen 6.2 years ago
United Kingdom
Quoting Gordon Smyth <smyth at="" wehi.edu.au="">: > > limma 2.2.0 was the version of limma at the time of last Bioconductor > release, but it is not the latest version of limma. Actually limma > 2.4.13 is available for R 2.2.0. Please read Section 2.2 > (Installation) of the Limma User's Guide for why this is so. ah! you are right, of course. Thanks for pointing that out. I now have the latest versions running, downloaded from CRAN. > There is no reason that I know of that should cause limma 2.02 and > limma 2.2.0 to give different results for the B-statistic. There was > a small change made in limma 2.4.0, and another in limma 2.4.13. > > You should probably become familiar with the limma change log. Type > changeLog(n=280) at the command line, and you'll see an entry for > limma 2.4.0 dated 11 Nov 2005. Thank you. I'll triple-check carefully to see if I am specifying anything differently on my limma or limmaGUI procedures... Jose -- Dr. Jose I. de las Heras Email: J.delasHeras at ed.ac.uk The Wellcome Trust Centre for Cell Biology Phone: +44 (0)131 6513374 Institute for Cell & Molecular Biology Fax: +44 (0)131 6507360 Swann Building, Mayfield Road University of Edinburgh Edinburgh EH9 3JR UK
ADD COMMENT

Login before adding your answer.

Traffic: 200 users visited in the last hour
Help About
FAQ
Access RSS
API
Stats

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

Powered by the version 2.3.6