This is a theoretical question. I am trying to do a comparative analysis (meta-analysis, preservation analysis, differential analysis, etc.) on the mRNA expression network constructed from WGCNA. I acknowledge that we were advised to choose the least power during the "pick soft threshold" step. However, essentially, the networks I am trying to compare were using different power.
My question is: What would be an appropriate procedure to compare multiple networks?
Does it matter if the networks are transformed by different power during the soft thresholding step? Similarly, does it matter if the networks/ modules were defined with different "deep" during the cut tree step?
I really appreciate your help.
•
written
by
cwwong13 •
1 answer
In WGCNA the module preservation analysis does not require two networks but one network (reference network) and a test dataset (normalized expression data). The analysis will tell you if the modules in the reference network are reproducible in the test dataset.
This approach is explained here: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1001057
Log in to answer this question.
-
How to Specify Power Parameter for Adjacency in modulePreservation() (WGCNA)
written by Berkan •
-
Forum: Do batches contain biological variations in omics data (RNAseq or scRNAseq)?
written by cwwong13 •
-
Should we assume UMI-based scRNAseq data is not compositional?
written by cwwong13 •
-
Molecular docking considerations
written by cwwong13 •
-
Choosing a high soft thresholding power in WGCNA, is it reasonable?
written by aristelliger •
-
Differential Network analysis
written by hubsnets •
-
ATAC-seq bowtie2 alignment and pre-alignment adapter clipping
written by cwwong13 •
-
Comparison of module expression across WGCNA networks
written by dmcleanuk •
-
WGCNA defining parameters for soft threshold in R?
written by madkitty
-
PhastCons score and LOD
written by lomolith •
