Agilent arrays: spot quality weights for limma
1
0
Entering edit mode
Guido Hooiveld ★ 3.9k
@guido-hooiveld-2020
Last seen 1 day ago
Wageningen University, Wageningen, the …
Dear listers, I am new to the anaysis of 2 dye arrays. Currently I am working with an Agilent dataset consisting of 15 arrays. I would appreciate if you could share your experiences on ways to 'filter' data using spot quality weights for use in limma, specifically whether it is smart to filter on intensity of the respective channels in relation (or not) to the respective background signals. In other words, is filtering cq. setting quality weights based on e.g. "gIsPosAndSignif" and/or "gIsWellAboveBG" and/or "gIsSaturated", ... (as determined by the Feauture Extraction software) wise to do? If so, what would be the best criterium/a for filtering? I searched the mailing list, but remarkably I only found this post https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/bioconductor/2005-September/010188.html but this does not fully address my questions. Thanks, Guido ------------------------------------------------ Guido Hooiveld, PhD Nutrition, Metabolism & Genomics Group Division of Human Nutrition Wageningen University Biotechnion, Bomenweg 2 NL-6703 HD Wageningen the Netherlands tel: (+)31 317 485788 fax: (+)31 317 483342 internet: http://nutrigene.4t.com <http: nutrigene.4t.com=""/> email: guido.hooiveld@wur.nl [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
limma limma • 974 views
ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode
Guido Hooiveld ★ 3.9k
@guido-hooiveld-2020
Last seen 1 day ago
Wageningen University, Wageningen, the …
Resend; my first mail apparently did not make it to the list..? ------------------------------------------------------ Dear listers, I am new to the anaysis of 2 dye arrays. Currently I am working with an Agilent dataset consisting of 15 arrays. I would appreciate if you could share your experiences on ways to 'filter' data using spot quality weights for use in limma, specifically whether it is smart to filter on intensity of the respective channels in relation (or not) to the respective background signals. In other words, is filtering cq. setting quality weights based on e.g. "gIsPosAndSignif" and/or "gIsWellAboveBG" and/or "gIsSaturated", ... (as determined by the Feauture Extraction software) wise to do? If so, what would be the best criterium/a for filtering? I searched the mailing list, but remarkably I only found this post https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/bioconductor/2005-September/010188.html but this does not fully address my questions. Thanks, Guido ------------------------------------------------ Guido Hooiveld, PhD Nutrition, Metabolism & Genomics Group Division of Human Nutrition Wageningen University Biotechnion, Bomenweg 2 NL-6703 HD Wageningen the Netherlands tel: (+)31 317 485788 fax: (+)31 317 483342 internet: http://nutrigene.4t.com <http: nutrigene.4t.com=""/> email: guido.hooiveld@wur.nl [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode
Dear Guido In my view, there is little to be gained by removing (or downweighting) individual data points (i.e. for particular features on particular arrays) compared to the complications incurred. However, it is often very useful to filter out features that are not performing well (or are consistently dim) throughout the experiment. That can be achieved, of course, simply by subsetting the NChannelSet of RGList object. This topic (independent or 'non-specific' filtering) has been amply discussed on this list. PS your mail did make it to the list, twice. Best wishes Wolfgang Hooiveld, Guido ha scritto: > Resend; my first mail apparently did not make it to the list..? > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Dear listers, > > I am new to the anaysis of 2 dye arrays. Currently I am working with an > Agilent dataset consisting of 15 arrays. I would appreciate if you could > share your experiences on ways to 'filter' data using spot quality > weights for use in limma, specifically whether it is smart to filter on > intensity of the respective channels in relation (or not) to the > respective background signals. > > In other words, is filtering cq. setting quality weights based on e.g. > "gIsPosAndSignif" and/or "gIsWellAboveBG" and/or "gIsSaturated", ... (as > determined by the Feauture Extraction software) wise to do? If so, what > would be the best criterium/a for filtering? > > I searched the mailing list, but remarkably I only found this post > https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/bioconductor/2005-September/010188.html > but this does not fully address my questions. > > Thanks, > Guido > > ------------------------------------------------ > Guido Hooiveld, PhD > Nutrition, Metabolism & Genomics Group > Division of Human Nutrition > Wageningen University > Biotechnion, Bomenweg 2 > NL-6703 HD Wageningen > the Netherlands > tel: (+)31 317 485788 > fax: (+)31 317 483342 > internet: http://nutrigene.4t.com <http: nutrigene.4t.com=""/> > email: guido.hooiveld at wur.nl > > > [[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 -- Best wishes Wolfgang -- Wolfgang Huber EMBL http://www.embl.de/research/units/genome_biology/huber/contact
ADD REPLY

Login before adding your answer.

Traffic: 838 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