Wencke Walter1, Bernd Striberny2, Emmanuel Gaquerel3,4, Ian T Baldwin5, Sang-Gyu Kim6,7, Ines Heiland8. 1. Department of Molecular Ecology, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, Hans-Knöll-Straße 8, D-07745, Jena, Germany. wwalter@cnic.es. 2. Department of Arctic and Marine Biology, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Naturfagbygget, Dramsvegen 201, 9037, Tromsø, Norway. bernd.ketelsen@uit.no. 3. Department of Molecular Ecology, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, Hans-Knöll-Straße 8, D-07745, Jena, Germany. egaquerel@ice.mpg.de. 4. Center for Organismal Studies, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 360, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. egaquerel@ice.mpg.de. 5. Department of Molecular Ecology, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, Hans-Knöll-Straße 8, D-07745, Jena, Germany. baldwin@ice.mpg.de. 6. Department of Molecular Ecology, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, Hans-Knöll-Straße 8, D-07745, Jena, Germany. skim@ice.mpg.de. 7. Center for Genome Engineering, Institute for Basic Science, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 151-747, South Korea. skim@ice.mpg.de. 8. Department of Arctic and Marine Biology, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Naturfagbygget, Dramsvegen 201, 9037, Tromsø, Norway. ines.heiland@uit.no.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As time series experiments in higher eukaryotes usually obtain data from different individuals collected at the different time points, a time series sample itself is not equivalent to a true biological replicate but is, rather, a combination of several biological replicates. The analysis of expression data derived from a time series sample is therefore often performed with a low number of replicates due to budget limitations or limitations in sample availability. In addition, most algorithms developed to identify specific patterns in time series dataset do not consider biological variation in samples collected at the same conditions. RESULTS: Using artificial time course datasets, we show that resampling considerably improves the accuracy of transcripts identified as rhythmic. In particular, the number of false positives can be greatly reduced while at the same time the number of true positives can be maintained in the range of other methods currently used to determine rhythmically expressed genes. CONCLUSIONS: The resampling approach described here therefore increases the accuracy of time series expression data analysis and furthermore emphasizes the importance of biological replicates in identifying oscillating genes. Resampling can be used for any time series expression dataset as long as the samples are acquired from independent individuals at each time point.
BACKGROUND: As time series experiments in higher eukaryotes usually obtain data from different individuals collected at the different time points, a time series sample itself is not equivalent to a true biological replicate but is, rather, a combination of several biological replicates. The analysis of expression data derived from a time series sample is therefore often performed with a low number of replicates due to budget limitations or limitations in sample availability. In addition, most algorithms developed to identify specific patterns in time series dataset do not consider biological variation in samples collected at the same conditions. RESULTS: Using artificial time course datasets, we show that resampling considerably improves the accuracy of transcripts identified as rhythmic. In particular, the number of false positives can be greatly reduced while at the same time the number of true positives can be maintained in the range of other methods currently used to determine rhythmically expressed genes. CONCLUSIONS: The resampling approach described here therefore increases the accuracy of time series expression data analysis and furthermore emphasizes the importance of biological replicates in identifying oscillating genes. Resampling can be used for any time series expression dataset as long as the samples are acquired from independent individuals at each time point.
Authors: R J Cho; M Huang; M J Campbell; H Dong; L Steinmetz; L Sapinoso; G Hampton; S J Elledge; R W Davis; D J Lockhart Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: S L Harmer; J B Hogenesch; M Straume; H S Chang; B Han; T Zhu; X Wang; J A Kreps; S A Kay Journal: Science Date: 2000-12-15 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Young Ji Na; Jung Hwan Sung; Suk Chan Lee; Young Ju Lee; Yeun Joo Choi; Woong Yang Park; Hee Sup Shin; Ju Han Kim Journal: Exp Mol Med Date: 2009-09-30 Impact factor: 8.718
Authors: Todd P Michael; Todd C Mockler; Ghislain Breton; Connor McEntee; Amanda Byer; Jonathan D Trout; Samuel P Hazen; Rongkun Shen; Henry D Priest; Christopher M Sullivan; Scott A Givan; Marcelo Yanovsky; Fangxin Hong; Steve A Kay; Joanne Chory Journal: PLoS Genet Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 5.917