This is a test version of Biostars. For the public version, visit https://www.biostars.org.
Alternative splicing: explanation about delta psi values

I am a bit confused.

I compared differentially expressed spliced transcripts between a sample 1 and a sample 2 using MISO algorithm.

The final (filtered) result table notably mentions the following info (this is an example for a transcript with 3 isoforms):

. delta PSI: -0.67,0.19,-0.87

. isoforms: isoform1,isoform2,isoform3 (isoform 1 is the inclusive form (with all exons); isoforms 2 and 3 are spliced)

According to MISO paper:

. PSI is the fraction of the inclusive transcript in a sample (i.e. not spliced if I understand well)

. delta PSI = PSI(sample1) - PSI(sample2)

Thus, for example:

. delta PSI(isoform1) = -0.67 means there are more inclusive transcript in sample 2 than sample 1,

. delta PSI(isoform2) = 0.19 means there are more inclusive transcript in sample 1 than sample 2, but how is it related to isoform2 which is known to be spliced? Does MISO report only the spliced isoforms in its output?

miso alternative splicing psi
• 9,507 views • link
updated by Kristoffer Vitting-Seerup Kristoffer Vitting-Seerup • written by user31888 user31888

Can I ask how you filtered your output when your sample has more than two isoforms? I'm aware that the documentation allows you to filter using the filter_events script, but thats only for two isoform events. You can filter on bayes-factor on >2 isoform events but this still outputs an note/error for me: "filter_events: filtering MISO pairwise comparison output.

Note: This utility is only works on MISO output for two-isoform event annotations.

Error: filter_events.py is only defined for MISO output on two-isoform alternative events. Found a non-two isoform event: ENSMUSG00000032469"

• 0 views • link
written by aarin.jones • aarin.jones

1 answer

I must admit I'm also a bit confused. Note sure how to interpret PSI values for isoforms (instead of an exon) since it have to be different than Isoform Fractions (as they are not summing to zero).

You could take a look at IsoformSwitchAnalyzeR to see whether that does what you want.

• 0 views • link
written by Kristoffer Vitting-Seerup Kristoffer Vitting-Seerup

I agree. It does not make any sense for isoform-centric analysis. I will definetely try your program. Does it require technical/biological replicates?

• 0 views • link
written by user31888 user31888

Yes (like everything else where you want to do statistics). It can however be run without but then the results are not trustworthy.

• 0 views • link
written by Kristoffer Vitting-Seerup Kristoffer Vitting-Seerup

Log in to answer this question.

More posts like this