Does sequencing depth affect MACS2 q-values?
I have input A and IP A, and I used MACS2 to call peaks. I also have input B and IP B, and the B set of peaks.
Set A had about 3x more sequencing depth than set B.
The two sets of peaks have ~similar~ distributions of fold enrichment values but the -log(q-value)s are generally much higher in set A.
Should I attribute the difference in q-values to the difference in sequencing depth? If not, how else might I explain this difference in q-values?
Thanks!
1 answer
There used to be (v1.4) a diagnosis option (--diag) that tested what happens when a random 10%, 20%, 30%, etc. of the reads were used in the analysis. But this does not appear to be available in MACS2. You could do this yourself by selecting sub-sets of reads, and repeat for the replicate. The qvalue is dependent on the distribution of P-values within an experiment, so it is possible if the distribution of P-values differs between replicates. You could try plotting the distribution of Pvalues for yourself.
Log in to answer this question.
-
How to make the Input track flat for ChIP-seq
written by dharitrisaikia162 •
-
macs callpeak q value cutoff 1 and 0.05 with different peak result
written by miao •
-
difference between treat_pileup and bdgcmp fold enrichment tracks macs2
written by buffealo •
-
No coverage in macs2 peak summit!
written by blur
-
the peaks of ChIPseq are few
written by Francis •
-
question about calling peak by macs2
written by ch8316f5eyu •
-
actual coverage vs. macs2
written by blur
-
MACS2 call differential binding events
written by sophialovechan •
-
Chipseq data with Mock, Input And IP
written by Sudhir Jadhao
-
Comparing two ChIP-seq libraries
written by ritarebollo
