1
vote
1
reply
497
views
0
votes
2
replies
903
views
0
votes
1
reply
976
views
updated 14 months ago by
helucro
▴
70
•
written 15 months ago by
shuangshuang
•
0
0
votes
0
replies
722
views
3.4 years ago
achaillon
•
0
0
votes
0
replies
526
views
0
votes
0
replies
668
views
3.5 years ago
GFM
▴
20
0
votes
0
replies
601
views
3.5 years ago
GFM
▴
20
2
votes
2
replies
1.4k
views
updated 4.5 years ago by
Martin Morgan
25k
•
written 4.5 years ago by
Brent.OCarrigan
•
0
0
votes
1
reply
619
views
4.6 years ago
jianjunchencn
•
0
0
votes
1
reply
907
views
updated 5.7 years ago by
James W. MacDonald
65k
•
written 5.7 years ago by
o.hunewald
•
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, 5 minutes ago
410 Lawrence Bell Dr suite 1, Buffalo, NY 14221, United States, 10 minutes ago
Italy, 20 minutes ago
The city by the bay, 48 minutes ago
India, 58 minutes ago
United States, 5 minutes ago
410 Lawrence Bell Dr suite 1, Buffalo, NY 14221, United States, 10 minutes ago
Italy, 20 minutes ago
The city by the bay, 48 minutes ago
India, 58 minutes ago
Traffic: 408 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