Search
Question: some help for Limma Factorial design for two color data.
0
gravatar for Adrian Johnson
9.5 years ago by
Adrian Johnson330 wrote:
Dear Prof. Smyth and experts, I am writing to you as a final option, after not finding an appropriate answer in BioC mailing list, internet and online tutorials. Although the documentation is the 'best reference', one particular piece is missing in the documentation may be due to its complexity. That is factorial design of a two-color microarray data. We are using mouse agilent chips for identifying effect of a drug on a mutant vs. normal mouse strain. We used dye-swap for some chips. The target files looks like this: > targets Array Cy3 Cy5 Treatment Shock 1 Array1 WT MU Y H 2 Array2 WT MU N C 3 Array3 WT MU Y H 4 Array4 MU WT N C 5 Array5 WT MU Y C 6 Array6 WT MU Y C The aim of the experiment is to find differentially expressed genes between MU and WT and importantly find genes differing between MU.Treated(Y) and MU.Untreated(N). Similarly MU.Heathshock - MU.Noheatshock(C). Since affy based estrogen data example is highlited in the documentation, I am not sure if the following code is correct or writing a design for this design is more complex that what I have attempted below. Method 1: -------------- >TS <- paste(targets$Cy5,targets$Cy3,targets$Treatment,sep='.') > TS <- factor(TS,levels=c("MU.WT.Y","MU.WT.N","MU.WT.Y","WT.MU.N","MU .WT.Y","MU.WT.Y")) > TS [1] MU.WT.Y MU.WT.N MU.WT.Y WT.MU.N MU.WT.Y MU.WT.Y Levels: MU.WT.Y MU.WT.N MU.WT.Y WT.MU.N MU.WT.Y MU.WT.Y > design <- model.matrix(~0+TS,ref='WT') > colnames(design) <- levels(TS) > design MU.WT.Y MU.WT.N MU.WT.Y WT.MU.N MU.WT.Y MU.WT.Y 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 attr(,"assign") [1] 1 1 1 1 1 1 attr(,"contrasts") attr(,"contrasts")$TS [1] "contr.treatment" I am not sure by this method, LiMMA understands dye-swam chips. Method 2: -------------- Instead, I created a matrix like the following > mm1 <- read.table('model_matrix1.txt',sep='\t',header=TRUE,stringsAs Factor=FALSE) > mm1 <- as.matrix(mm1) > mm1 Mu.T Mu.NT [1,] 1 0 [2,] 0 1 [3,] 1 0 [4,] 0 -1 [5,] 1 0 [6,] 1 0 > myFit <- lmFit(MA,mm1) > myFit <- eBayes(myfit) # here Mu.NT is Mutant no treatment. method 2 when tried on my data, it works, and I get differentially expressed genes but I am not sure if those genes are correct. Which one of these methods is correct. I am not sure. If both are wrong, how can I do this correctly. Please help me. thank you. Adrian.
ADD COMMENTlink modified 9.4 years ago by De-Jian ZHAO240 • written 9.5 years ago by Adrian Johnson330
0
gravatar for De-Jian ZHAO
9.4 years ago by
De-Jian ZHAO240
De-Jian ZHAO240 wrote:
Dear list members and especially limma users, For the absence of examples about factorial design using two-color arrays* in limma user's guide,I resort to this email list in the hope of getting a hint. (* Chapter 8.7 takes single-color arrays for example. * Chapter 11.5 takes two-color arrays for example. However, when constructing design matrix, a common reference is chosen, which makes it the same way to make contrast matrix as in single-color arrays.) Previously Adrian Johnson posed a question about limma factorial design and proposed two answers for discussion. Later Naomi Altman gave another solution. I have no idea which answer is right and I'd like to post my answer here for discussion. WT and MU are untreated while wt and mu are treated (see diagram below). The linking lines stand for hybridizations and there are dye-swap hybridizations in the four comparisons. The interested contrasts are mu-MU, wt-WT, and (mu-MU)-(wt-WT). I make the design matrix using WT as ref. My way of making contrast matrix may be controversial but I think it is reasonable. The contrast matrix wt-WT is set to wt ("wt_WT"=wt), because WT is used as ref in making design matrix thus wt means comparison with WT implicitly. There should not be an argument about "mu_MU"=mu-MU. As to the contrast matrix "(mu_MU)_(wt_WT)"=(mu-MU)-wt, it can be explained in the same way as "wt_WT"=wt. Although I consider it reasonable, I am not that confident. Any feedback is welcome. The diagram for the experimental design and the code are listed below. For the convenience of comparison and discussion, Adrian and Naomi's methods are also pasted below. wt----mu <--treated | | WT---MU <--untreated > targets<-read.table("targets.csv",header=T) > targets Cy3 Cy5 FileName 1 wt WT 1.gpr 2 mu MU 2.gpr 3 MU WT 3.gpr 4 mu wt 4.gpr 5 WT wt 5.gpr 6 MU mu 6.gpr 7 WT MU 7.gpr 8 wt mu 8.gpr > design<-modelMatrix(targets,ref="WT") #<----WT as ref! Found unique target names: mu MU wt WT > design mu MU wt [1,] 0 0 -1 [2,] -1 1 0 [3,] 0 -1 0 [4,] -1 0 1 [5,] 0 0 1 [6,] 1 -1 0 [7,] 0 1 0 [8,] 1 0 -1 > contrast.matrix<-makeContrasts("wt_WT"=wt,"mu_MU"=mu- MU,"(mu_MU)_(wt_WT)"=(mu-MU)-wt,levels=design) > contrast.matrix Contrasts Levels wt_WT mu_MU (mu_MU)_(wt_WT) mu 0 1 1 MU 0 -1 -1 wt 1 0 -1 Adrian Johnson wrote: > Dear Prof. Smyth and experts, > > I am writing to you as a final option, after not finding an > appropriate answer in BioC mailing list, internet and online > tutorials. > Although the documentation is the 'best reference', one particular > piece is missing in the documentation may be due to its complexity. > That is factorial design of a two-color microarray data. > > We are using mouse agilent chips for identifying effect of a drug on a > mutant vs. normal mouse strain. We used dye-swap for some chips. The > target files looks like this: > >> targets >> > Array Cy3 Cy5 Treatment Shock > 1 Array1 WT MU Y H > 2 Array2 WT MU N C > 3 Array3 WT MU Y H > 4 Array4 MU WT N C > 5 Array5 WT MU Y C > 6 Array6 WT MU Y C > > The aim of the experiment is to find differentially expressed genes > between MU and WT and importantly find genes differing between > MU.Treated(Y) and MU.Untreated(N). > Similarly MU.Heathshock - MU.Noheatshock(C). > > Since affy based estrogen data example is highlited in the > documentation, I am not sure if the following code is correct or > writing a design for this design is more complex that what I have > attempted below. > > Method 1: > -------------- > > >> TS <- paste(targets$Cy5,targets$Cy3,targets$Treatment,sep='.') >> > > >> TS <- factor(TS,levels=c("MU.WT.Y","MU.WT.N","MU.WT.Y","WT.MU.N","M U.WT.Y","MU.WT.Y")) >> > > >> TS >> > [1] MU.WT.Y MU.WT.N MU.WT.Y WT.MU.N MU.WT.Y MU.WT.Y > Levels: MU.WT.Y MU.WT.N MU.WT.Y WT.MU.N MU.WT.Y MU.WT.Y > > >> design <- model.matrix(~0+TS,ref='WT') >> > > >> colnames(design) <- levels(TS) >> > > >> design >> > MU.WT.Y MU.WT.N MU.WT.Y WT.MU.N MU.WT.Y MU.WT.Y > 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 > 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 > 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 > 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 > 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 > 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 > attr(,"assign") > [1] 1 1 1 1 1 1 > attr(,"contrasts") > attr(,"contrasts")$TS > [1] "contr.treatment" > > I am not sure by this method, LiMMA understands dye-swam chips. > > Method 2: > -------------- > Instead, I created a matrix like the following > >> mm1 <- read.table('model_matrix1.txt',sep='\t',header=TRUE,stringsA sFactor=FALSE) >> mm1 <- as.matrix(mm1) >> mm1 >> > Mu.T Mu.NT > [1,] 1 0 > [2,] 0 1 > [3,] 1 0 > [4,] 0 -1 > [5,] 1 0 > [6,] 1 0 > >> myFit <- lmFit(MA,mm1) >> myFit <- eBayes(myfit) >> > > # here Mu.NT is Mutant no treatment. > method 2 when tried on my data, it works, and I get differentially > expressed genes but I am not sure if those genes are correct. > > Which one of these methods is correct. I am not sure. If both are > wrong, how can I do this correctly. Please help me. > thank you. > Adrian. > > _______________________________________________ > Bioconductor mailing list > Bioconductor at stat.math.ethz.ch > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor > Search the archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.science.biology.informatics.conductor > > Naomi Altman wrote: > I generally find it easier to do a single channel analysis for these > more complicated designs. Just follow the manual for single channel > and you can then use the treatments directly to form the contrasts. > > --Naomi > > At 12:14 PM 10/31/2008, Adrian Johnson wrote: >> Hi : >> sorry for re-sending the my question. Lookinf forward for some help. >> thanks. >> I searched bioconductor list archive and could not find appropriate >> modelmatrix and contrast matrix fitting >> for the following type of data from two color. >> >> >> > targets >> Array Cy3 Cy5 Treatment Shock >> 1 Array1 WT MU Y H >> 2 Array2 WT MU N C >> 3 Array3 WT MU Y H >> 4 Array4 MU WT N C >> 5 Array5 WT MU Y C >> 6 Array6 WT MU Y C >> >> >> I want to compare (MU.WT-Y) - (MU.WT-N) >> and (MU.WT-H)-(MU.WT-C) >> >> How can I design my model matrix and fit contrasts. >> >> Could some one help me please. >> >> thanks >> Ad. >> >> [[alternative HTML version deleted]] >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bioconductor mailing list >> Bioconductor at stat.math.ethz.ch >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor >> Search the archives: >> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.science.biology.informatics.conductor > > Naomi S. Altman 814-865-3791 (voice) > Associate Professor > Dept. of Statistics 814-863-7114 (fax) > Penn State University 814-865-1348 (Statistics) > University Park, PA 16802-2111 > > _______________________________________________ > Bioconductor mailing list > Bioconductor at stat.math.ethz.ch > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor > Search the archives: > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.science.biology.informatics.conductor >
ADD COMMENTlink written 9.4 years ago by De-Jian ZHAO240
Please log in to add an answer.

Help
Access

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Powered by Biostar version 2.2.0
Traffic: 190 users visited in the last hour