updated 1 day ago by
ATpoint
★
4.1k
•
written 2 days ago by
pangtaihin
•
0
4
votes
9
replies
231
views
2
votes
7
replies
364
views
10 days ago • updated 6 days ago
sajadahmad41454
•
0
1
vote
2
replies
226
views
4 days ago • updated 1 day ago
BioinfGuru
▴
30
0
votes
8
replies
487
views
updated 3 days ago by
BioinfGuru
▴
30
•
written 4 days ago by
Eric Katagirya
•
0
0
votes
3
replies
104
views
updated 2 days ago by
Michael Love
42k
•
written 3 days ago by
Kasper
•
0
0
votes
1
reply
84
views
updated 3 days ago by
Michael Love
42k
•
written 4 days ago by
piemmea
•
0
0
votes
1
reply
52
views
15 hours ago • updated 14 hours ago
shaunpeterson
•
0
0
votes
2
replies
125
views
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.
WEHI, Melbourne, Australia, 12 minutes ago
Poland, 36 minutes ago
United States, 43 minutes ago
India, 59 minutes ago
The city by the bay, 1 hour ago
WEHI, Melbourne, Australia, 12 minutes ago
Poland, 36 minutes ago
United States, 43 minutes ago
India, 59 minutes ago
The city by the bay, 1 hour ago
Traffic: 523 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