12 hours ago • updated 11 hours ago
shaunpeterson
•
0
0
votes
1
reply
44
views
0
votes
2
replies
84
views
4
votes
9
replies
230
views
updated 1 day ago by
ATpoint
★
4.1k
•
written 2 days ago by
pangtaihin
•
0
0
votes
3
replies
101
views
updated 2 days ago by
Michael Love
42k
•
written 3 days ago by
Kasper
•
0
1
vote
2
replies
225
views
4 days ago • updated 1 day ago
BioinfGuru
▴
30
0
votes
8
replies
481
views
updated 3 days ago by
BioinfGuru
▴
30
•
written 4 days ago by
Eric Katagirya
•
0
0
votes
1
reply
83
views
updated 3 days ago by
Michael Love
42k
•
written 4 days ago by
piemmea
•
0
2
votes
7
replies
363
views
9 days ago • updated 6 days ago
sajadahmad41454
•
0
Recent ...
Replies
Comment: Numerical differences in DESeq2 output depending on different design matrix cons
by
JKim
•
0
The 1st model has an interaction term, but the 2nd model doesn't have the interaction term. That makes the difference.
Comment: Ensembl plants at annotationHub?
by
Daniele
•
0
Hi,
I'm using Ensembl Plants release 59 with the IWGSC RefSeq v1.1 gene annotation.
Thanks a lot for replying so quickly!
Comment: Numerical differences in DESeq2 output depending on different design matrix cons
by
swbarnes2
★
1.4k
If you restrict yourself to, say, genes with a baseMean > 50, are the numerical differences between the two designs significant?
Comment: DESeq2- Mysterious interaction suppresses DEGs
by
shaunpeterson
•
0
The images I tried to attach didn't attach. Here is the PCA (MDS) of all the samples, with the Cortex outlier highlighed.
United States, 13 minutes ago
WEHI, Melbourne, Australia, 24 minutes ago
Melbourne, Australia, 25 minutes ago
The city by the bay, 1 hour ago
Poland, 1 hour ago
United States, 13 minutes ago
WEHI, Melbourne, Australia, 24 minutes ago
Melbourne, Australia, 25 minutes ago
The city by the bay, 1 hour ago
Poland, 1 hour ago
Traffic: 378 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