Interaction tests and paired interaction tests in swish
1
0
Entering edit mode
Nicholas • 0
@d384e3d5
Last seen 10 weeks ago
United States

I have pairs of rna-seq samples from many cells that were exposed to different targeting and non-targeting knockdowns against three different genes. Each pair consists of material that come from the inner part of the cell and the outer part of the cell. So we don't expect them pairs to be the same or have the same baseline, but we are interested in the differences between those locations. My understanding of pairs in fishpond means that I should probably use pairing because it assumes the baselines are the same. Therefore, if we use pairing the differences will be highlighted, which I want.

I want to run three different tests:

  1. targeting vs non-targeting guides for the same gene target
  2. inner cellular zone vs the cellular periphery for each knockdown guide
  3. A look at the interaction between knockdown guide and cellular zone

After poring over the documentation, I am still unclear whether I should use a covariate term and/or a pairing term for each of these.

I have done the following so far:

  1. One simple condition term for test 1
  2. One simple condition term for test 2
  3. A condition plus pairing for test 3. The documentation suggests that should be equivalent to an interaction term. Is that correct? Because it only allows 1 sample per condition for the pairing, I would expect that I should actually include the covariate term so that I can do a four-way comparison (2 guides x 2 cellular zones). The covariate term is actually something this model considers a batch effect and will attempt to correct for, isn't that correct?

Finally, I am a little unclear about which output I should be most concerned with for each question. Currently, I am looking at LFC. But the actual test statistic may be more valuable since it seems to include both likelihood, such as the q-value, and the the difference, as in the LFC. I would expect the Mann-Whitney Wilcoxin to give a U and a p-value, not a q-value.

Is my current approach the correct one for what I hope to learn?

swish salmon fishpond • 299 views
ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode
@mikelove
Last seen 2 hours ago
United States

I'm trying to parse the first part but you switch from talking about samples to talking about guides. Can you rephrase in terms of samples maybe, to make the question more generic?

Best of all would be to mock up a little sample table, e.g.:

pair condition
1 A
1 B
2 A
2 B
...

That will help me visualize the types of comparison you like to make.

All the tests in Swish give both a p-value and a q-value (the latter FDR controlled). This uses the qvalue function from the qvalue package.

ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode

When I attempt to edit my original question, it says there is a field that is required, but I cannot find it, so apologies if this is not the right place to respond.

My experimental design can be summarized with the following table:

**pair**         **condition**                   **cellular zone**
   1                 treatment                        soma
   1                 treatment                        neurite
   2                 mock-treatment                   soma
   2                 mock-treatment                   neurite

The soma and neurite samples from each pair come from the same cell. Even though we expect those samples to be different, we are interested in their differences, so the pair term seems appropriate.

I want to run three different tests:

  1. treatment vs mock treatment in the same cellular zone
  2. neurite vs. soma within the same condition
  3. The interaction between condition and cellular zone

How I have approached this so far:

  1. swish(y, x="condition") with the input subset to the same cellular zone
  2. swish(y, x-"cellular zone") with the input subset to the same condition
  3. swish(y, x="condition", pair="pair") with the input subset to treatment_soma vs mock-treatment neurite The documentation states that using the pair term is analagous to creating an interaction term. So I tried to do that. I don't want to control for a batch effect so I have avoided using the cov term. The documentation also says that using a paired term considers both items in a pair to have the same baseline, which I think I want because I want to compare the soma vs neurite, and those samples did come from the same cell. However, despite all those reasons for setting up the test that way, having to artificially subset the samples the way I did seems like it would take away some of the variation I am interested in. So, did I do it correctly?
ADD REPLY
0
Entering edit mode

I think there is a temporary bug in the edit button on the support site, this works. Of your approaches:

1 - looks correct 2 - I would use swish(y, x="cellular_zone", pair="pair") so that you have more power by accounting for the pairs 3 - I would only include pair if you were comparing across cellular zone (CZ), so not exactly.

If you want to know if if the CZ effect changes across condition that would be:

swish(y, x="cellular_zone", cov="condition", pair="pair", interaction=TRUE)

As in here: https://thelovelab.github.io/fishpond/articles/swish.html#interaction-designs

ADD REPLY

Login before adding your answer.

Traffic: 668 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