choose normalized counts or log2FC when do correlation in RNAseq
Dear guys,
Which one is better/prefers to do correlation analysis for the RNAseq samples? Use the normalized counts or log2FC(comparison groups)? If use the log2FC to do the correlation of different comparisons, how to deal with the pvalue/padj of each log2FC?
Thank you very much!
• 1,095 views
•
link
updated
by
bioinfo_ga •
•
written
by
dew •
•
written
by
dew •
1 answer
Normalized counts are always better to identify the samples correlating and the outliers. log2FC is already a single value for two or more samples and will not give an idea of individual samples. pvalue/padj should only be considered if you have replicates in your study, preferably 3 or more .
• 0 views
•
link
written
by
bioinfo_ga •
Log in to answer this question.
More posts like this
-
How to plot PCA for DEGs
written by otieno43 •
-
recommend gene ranking methods when doing GSEA
written by luckyday1661 •
-
Can I normalize several samples with DESeq2 and then do pairwise comparisons?
written by bioinfo •
-
possible reasons that very few significant DEGs from RNAseq
written by dew •
-
how to deal with correlation map with multi repeats for one group
written by dew •
-
correlation among RNAseq and proteomics analysis
written by dew •
-
DEG but counts in only one sample!
written by andreiareis1987 •
-
Can I use absolut numbers (not log values) to make a Heatmap?
written by silas008
-
RNA-seq analysis: How to output normalized counts or normalized FPKM values for all genes in each c…
written by sclittlerain •
-
How to directly compare normalized read counts across subgroups within a metatranscriptome?
written by N15
