Thank you for your feedback.
I am using Diffbind to call differential peaks on an ATAC seq dataset of four conditions (AW, BW, B, and C), and each condition has 2 replicates. One of my replicates (BW2) has low quality (low number of peaks detected by MACS2 compared to the other replicate, and low FRiP).
I got very low number of significant peaks for the comparison BW x AW, and it is expected because of the low quality of one of the replicates. But why I get a high number of peaks for the other comparisons that include this low quality replicate? I am worried if there is any issue with the analysis. Any suggestions?
dbObj <- dba(sampleSheet=samples, minOverlap=2)
consensus <- dba.peakset(dbObj, consensus = DBA_CONDITION, minOverlap=2)
consensus <- dba(consensus, consensus$masks$Consensus, minOverlap=1)
consensus.peaks <- dba.peakset(consensus, bRetrieve=TRUE)
counts <- dba.count(dbObj, peaks=consensus.peaks)
contrast <- dba.contrast(counts, categories=DBA_FACTOR, minMembers = 2)
analysed.consensus <- dba.analyze(contrast, method=DBA_ALL_METHODS, bBlacklist=FALSE, bGreylist=FALSE)
My results are:
Design: [~Factor] | 6 Contrasts:
Factor Group Samples Group2 Samples2
1 Factor BW 2 AW 2
2 Factor BW 2 C 2
3 Factor BW 2 BT 2
4 Factor AW 2 C 2
5 Factor AW 2 BT 2
6 Factor BT 2 C 2
8 Samples, 113008 sites in matrix:
ID Factor Condition Replicate Reads FRiP
1 BW1 BW BW 1 18351704 0.21
2 BW2 BW BW 2 23909409 0.07
3 AW1 AW AW 1 27899970 0.11
4 AW2 AW AW 2 27712756 0.15
5 C1 C C 1 19207760 0.44
6 C2 C C 2 38438952 0.46
7 BT1 BT BT 1 35313077 0.35
8 BT2 BT BT 2 33108371 0.35
Design: [~Factor] | 6 Contrasts:
Factor Group Samples Group2 Samples2 DB.edgeR DB.DESeq2
1 Factor BW 2 AW 2 125 0
2 Factor BW 2 C 2 83426 81864
3 Factor BW 2 BT 2 54819 56533
4 Factor AW 2 C 2 88260 84513
5 Factor AW 2 BT 2 60529 61937
6 Factor BT 2 C 2 25749 19873
1 answer
I suspect that the answer lies in the FRiP values. The C and BT samples have consistently high FRiPs, indicating greater overall enrichment. It is likely that most consensus regions are much more lowly enriched in both the "good" BW sample and the poor one as compared to the C or BT samples. If the fold changes are great enough, even a low-powered experiment can detect the differences.
By this reasoning, the expected fold changes in the significantly different BW regions should overwhelmingly have the same sign (negative for contrasts 2 and 3).
Log in to answer this question.