Closed jayypaul closed 6 months ago
Hi @jayypaul, this is hard to diagnose because it may be caused by very different issues. I would check the model:
Hey David,
Thanks for your response. This is what I used:
testReal = de.test.wald( data = a, formula_loc = "~ 1 + Time + Condition", # Including batch won't work. factor_loc_totest = ['Intercept', 'Condition[T.Naive]', 'Condition[T.PCL]', 'Condition[T.Saline]', 'Time[T.Week_6]'] )
I have 2 timepoints, 4 different treatments. Each treatment per timepoint so 8 batches. Not really sure how to use this formula honestly.
Hi @jayypaul, you might want to consult with a local statistician on this, as there are a lot of points to be cleared up.
Hey David,
Thanks for the insight. That makes sense. Another question if you don't mind, to clarify. So since I have 4 conditions (uninjured = naive, saline, 1 biomaterial ECM, another biomaterial PCL), and I wanted to look at the DE genes in ECM compared to the rest, how do I specify that coefficient since that seems to be the reference group to all others (as in above)? Likewise, for timepoint week 1 as the reference group to week 6?
Also, If I wanted to test the specific effects of PCL at timepoint 6 (DE genes compared to rest of data), would I test: "Time[T.Week_6]:Condition[T.PCL]" when I specify the formula: ~ 1 + Time + Condition + Time * Condition
Error message when doing: plot_vs_ttest()
It seems my DE didn't work because these commands yield the following results:
print(testReal.pval[:10]) print(testReal.qval[:10]) print(testReal.summary().iloc[:10,:])
[ 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. nan 0. nan 0. nan] [ 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. nan 0. nan 0. nan] gene pval qval log2fc mean zero_mean grad \ 0 0610009B22Rik 0.0 0.0 -2.548860 0.077986 False 2.152200e-09
1 0610009E02Rik 0.0 0.0 -5.538207 0.003878 False 1.559083e-09
2 0610009L18Rik 0.0 0.0 -3.834557 0.023685 False 1.799609e-09
3 0610010F05Rik 0.0 0.0 -2.349601 0.099437 False 1.004665e-09
4 0610010K14Rik 0.0 0.0 -4.677474 0.009545 False 3.948096e-09
5 0610012D04Rik NaN NaN -297.776029 0.001076 False 2.132940e-03
6 0610012G03Rik 0.0 0.0 -1.521848 0.211496 False 3.416914e-09
7 0610025J13Rik NaN NaN -297.776029 0.000821 False 1.240152e-03
8 0610030E20Rik 0.0 0.0 -2.573128 0.089237 False 2.278429e-09
9 0610033M10Rik NaN NaN -297.776029 0.001416 False 1.198979e-03
0 -5247.489606
1 -433.791309
2 -1980.965365
3 -6226.564384
4 -946.499919
5 -1321.282389
6 -11006.115975
7 -1355.008785
8 -5764.351236
9 -1822.326354
Not to mention the volcano plot looks atrocious. Not sure what the problem could be. Very early on I had to turn the dense matrices of my separate batches into sparse matrices so I can concatenate using union. Any suggestions?