updated 7.0 years ago by
Gordon Smyth
52k
•
written 7.0 years ago by
Alexander Azarian
▴
30
0
votes
1
reply
990
views
Recent ...
Replies
Comment: ROAST compare results with complex design
by
Gordon Smyth
52k
It's also worth pointing out that the syntax for `camera` and `mroast` is the same, so I wonder how OP did the earlier `camera` analysis.
Answer: ROAST compare results with complex design
by
James W. MacDonald
68k
You are specifying that the last column of your design should be used as the contrast. You should instead use `contrast[,1]`, which will us…
Comment: How to account for solvent controls in DESeq2 when comparing follicular vs lutea
by
James W. MacDonald
68k
Yes. You can infer that by figuring out what each coefficient measures. Here is your design matrix:
```
> targets
ID Name phase G…
Comment: How to account for solvent controls in DESeq2 when comparing follicular vs lutea
by
snijesh
▴
200
I would like to clarify whether the command
`res <- results(dds, name = "phaseLP.conditionTreated")`
is the correct approach to generate …
Comment: How to account for solvent controls in DESeq2 when comparing follicular vs lutea
by
James W. MacDonald
68k
Not sure I understand. You ask how to do something and then show how one would do so.
Votes
Awards
• All
Popular Question to
Gordon Smyth
52k
Popular Question to
boczniak767
▴
740
Popular Question to
Young Tae
•
0
Popular Question to
Robert Castelo
★
3.4k
Popular Question to
littlefishes20
▴
10
Locations
• All
WEHI, Melbourne, Australia, 3 minutes ago
United States, 1 hour ago
Poland, 2 hours ago
United States, 2 hours ago
The city by the bay, 2 hours ago
WEHI, Melbourne, Australia, 3 minutes ago
United States, 1 hour ago
Poland, 2 hours ago
United States, 2 hours ago
The city by the bay, 2 hours ago
Traffic: 707 users visited in the last hour
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Powered by the
version 2.3.6
version 2.3.6