Open QianLLLL opened 1 year ago
@QianLLLL Sorry for the late. You might need to check the calculated prob
and pval
, which give the interaction strength and pvalue information. you may can figure out the reason.
@sqjin No worries! Thanks for your answer!
So from what I'm understanding, the Biologically significant CCI not only depends on gene expression but also on pval, right? If there is a significant difference in ligand-receptor gene expression, it might be explained more simply, otherwise, I need further to check pval and prob. I don't know if my understanding is reasonable.
And I got another question about the formula in the picture, I don't understand the AN. From the paper method part, I just saw the N was defined as the number of ligand-receptor pairs. I'm a little confused about the AN definition.
Looking forward to your reply! Thanks again!
Sincerely, Qian Liu
Hello @sqjin and @QianLLLL , I met the same situation that I got significant communication of certain signaling when comparing 2 datasets, while the gene expressions were not quite different between them. Could you please explain more about this? Thanks! Best, Yuanjian
Hi! I felt really confused about the signaling-related gene expression and the ligand-receptor pair when I plot them.
This figure showed that there had an interaction between T/NK cells and AST1 in the ApoeKO group but not in the ApoeWT group.
Then I checked PSAP signaling pathway-related gene expression.
ApoeKO group ApoeWT group
I didn't see a significant difference in PSAP signaling pathway-related gene expression between these two groups.
What is written in the CellChat article is that the calculation of intercellular communication probability is based on the expression of genes. However, if the gene expression in the two groups of cells is not significantly different, how should I explain the obvious difference in ligand-receptor interaction between them?
Looking forward to your reply! Thanks in advance!
Sincerely, Qian Liu