| Literature DB >> 28003264 |
Zheng-Zheng Tang1, Guanhua Chen1, Alexander V Alekseyenko2,3, Hongzhe Li4.
Abstract
Motivation: : Association analysis of microbiome composition with disease-related outcomes provides invaluable knowledge towards understanding the roles of microbes in the underlying disease mechanisms. Proper analysis of sparse compositional microbiome data is challenging. Existing methods rely on strong assumptions on the data structure and fail to pinpoint the associated microbial communities.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28003264 PMCID: PMC5408811 DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btw804
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioinformatics ISSN: 1367-4803 Impact factor: 6.937
Type I error of asymptotic tests
| n | Test | Dirichlet | Log-Normal | ZILN(a) | ZILN(b) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without confounders | |||||
| 50 | 0.032 | 0.038 | 0.040 | 0.038 | |
| 0.044 | – | 0.044 | 0.038 | ||
| 0.045 | – | 0.044 | 0.039 | ||
| 0.038 | – | 0.044 | 0.036 | ||
| DM | 0.030 | 0.021 | 0.037 | 0.021 | |
| 100 | 0.040 | 0.043 | 0.041 | 0.048 | |
| 0.044 | – | 0.044 | 0.046 | ||
| 0.046 | – | 0.044 | 0.048 | ||
| 0.038 | – | 0.043 | 0.040 | ||
| DM | 0.042 | 0.017 | 0.035 | 0.021 | |
| With a confounder | |||||
| 50 | 0.020 | 0.014 | 0.018 | 0.010 | |
| 0.021 | – | 0.015 | 0.024 | ||
| 0.032 | – | 0.020 | 0.028 | ||
| 0.018 | – | 0.015 | 0.014 | ||
| DM | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.077 | 0.12 | |
| 100 | 0.039 | 0.035 | 0.053 | 0.028 | |
| 0.039 | – | 0.039 | 0.032 | ||
| 0.044 | – | 0.047 | 0.041 | ||
| 0.041 | – | 0.036 | 0.030 | ||
| DM | 0.38 | 0.59 | 0.17 | 0.35 |
Fig. 1Power as a function of the degree of perturbation under Dirichlet and log-normal models
Fig. 2Power as a function of the degree of perturbation under zero-inflated log-normal models. The left panels pertain to ZILN (a) and the right panels pertain to ZILN (b). The pattern of perturbation is indicated above each graph
Fig. 3Simulation results for association tests on the taxonomic tree. (a) Discovery rate at genus Streptococcus. (b) Power of the global test. The total sample size is indicated above each graph
Fig. 4Taxonomic tree for the cutaneous microbiome. The root nodes of the discovered lineages are annotated by the names of the corresponding taxa. Four phyla that dominate the skin microbial community are also annotated