Okay, thank you for your valuable insights
Hello
I am performing differential gene expression using DESeq2 package. The volcano plot showed unequal distribution between upregulated and downregulated genes. The script used for the analysis is as follows
library(DESeq2)
library(tibble)
#Phenodata
Phenodata<- read.csv(" ") # 25 cases and 22 controls
#Reading the raw count matrix
Data<- read.delim(".txt", check.names = F, sep = "")
dds <- DESeqDataSetFromMatrix(Data,
Phenodata,
design = ~ Diagnosis)
# Create DESeq
dds2 <- DESeq(dds)
#filtering the genes
smallestGroupSize <- 22
keep <- rowSums(counts(dds2) >= 30) >= smallestGroupSize
dds2<- dds2[keep,]
vsd <- vst(dds2, blind=TRUE)
mat <- assay(vsd)
plotPCA(vsd, intgroup=c("Diagnosis"))
# Differential expression analysis
resultsNames(dds2)
res_group_CTR_vs_case <- results(object = dds2, name="Diagnosis_case_vs_CNT", alpha = 0.05)
# Summary of DE analysis
summary(res_group_CTR_vs_case)
# MA plot
DESeq2::plotMA(res_group_CTR_vs_case)
# Volcano plot
library(EnhancedVolcano)
EnhancedVolcano(res_group_CTR_vs_case,
lab = NA,
x = 'log2FoldChange',
y = 'pvalue',
pCutoff = 0.05,
FCcutoff = 1.0) + ggplot2::coord_cartesian(ylim=c(0, 10))
The MA plot and Volcano plot obtained are as follows:
I want to know whether the volcano plot is correct or if there are any preprocessing issues with the analysis. Also, could you suggest ways to improve the distribution in the volcano plot by changing any step in the analysis?
Thank you
2 answers
Hi, for me all looks normal. Your MA plot shows a normal distribution of points and what you see is that you do not have too much differentially expressed genes. In my opinion they look goods. Always make sure coldata rownames and rownames of the matrix that built de Deseq object have the same order. One thing you could do is to look for known makers of your experiment and see where they fall.
Log in to answer this question.