0
votes
0
replies
183
views
0
votes
4
replies
3.2k
views
0
votes
0
replies
330
views
0
votes
1
reply
1.2k
views
0
votes
1
reply
884
views
updated 4.0 years ago by
Kevin Blighe
★
3.9k
•
written 4.0 years ago by
Robert Baer
▴
70
0
votes
0
replies
550
views
4.1 years ago
christopher.hall
•
0
0
votes
7
replies
1.8k
views
updated 4.5 years ago by
gianni
•
0
•
written 4.5 years ago by
vinko.tosevski
•
0
0
votes
0
replies
828
views
5.7 years ago
crostomily
•
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.
India, 20 minutes ago
United States, 43 minutes ago
WEHI, Melbourne, Australia, 54 minutes ago
Melbourne, Australia, 55 minutes ago
The city by the bay, 1 hour ago
India, 20 minutes ago
United States, 43 minutes ago
WEHI, Melbourne, Australia, 54 minutes ago
Melbourne, Australia, 55 minutes ago
The city by the bay, 1 hour ago
Traffic: 381 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