Literature DB >> 29658777

Simple Comparative Analyses of Differentially Expressed Gene Lists May Overestimate Gene Overlap.

Chelsea M Lawhorn1, Rachel Schomaker2, Jonathan T Rowell3, Olav Rueppell4.   

Abstract

Comparing the overlap between sets of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) within or between transcriptome studies is regularly used to infer similarities between biological processes. Significant overlap between two sets of DEGs is usually determined by a simple test. The number of potentially overlapping genes is compared to the number of genes that actually occur in both lists, treating every gene as equal. However, gene expression is controlled by transcription factors that bind to a variable number of transcription factor binding sites, leading to variation among genes in general variability of their expression. Neglecting this variability could therefore lead to inflated estimates of significant overlap between DEG lists. With computer simulations, we demonstrate that such biases arise from variation in the control of gene expression. Significant overlap commonly arises between two lists of DEGs that are randomly generated, assuming that the control of gene expression is variable among genes but consistent between corresponding experiments. More overlap is observed when transcription factors are specific to their binding sites and when the number of genes is considerably higher than the number of different transcription factors. In contrast, overlap between two DEG lists is always lower than expected when the genetic architecture of expression is independent between the two experiments. Thus, the current methods for determining significant overlap between DEGs are potentially confounding biologically meaningful overlap with overlap that arises due to variability in control of expression among genes, and more sophisticated approaches are needed.

Keywords:  differentially expressed genes; gene regulation; genetic architecture; transcription factor binding sites; transcriptome

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29658777      PMCID: PMC5998827          DOI: 10.1089/cmb.2017.0262

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Biol        ISSN: 1066-5277            Impact factor:   1.479


  22 in total

1.  Analysis of variance for gene expression microarray data.

Authors:  M K Kerr; M Martin; G A Churchill
Journal:  J Comput Biol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.479

2.  Guideline to reference gene selection for quantitative real-time PCR.

Authors:  Aleksandar Radonić; Stefanie Thulke; Ian M Mackay; Olfert Landt; Wolfgang Siegert; Andreas Nitsche
Journal:  Biochem Biophys Res Commun       Date:  2004-01-23       Impact factor: 3.575

3.  Human housekeeping genes are compact.

Authors:  Eli Eisenberg; Erez Y Levanon
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 11.639

Review 4.  The evolutionary significance of cis-regulatory mutations.

Authors:  Gregory A Wray
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 53.242

Review 5.  The promise of whole-exome sequencing in medical genetics.

Authors:  Bahareh Rabbani; Mustafa Tekin; Nejat Mahdieh
Journal:  J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 3.172

6.  Transcriptome responses to combinations of stresses in Arabidopsis.

Authors:  Simon Rasmussen; Pankaj Barah; Maria Cristina Suarez-Rodriguez; Simon Bressendorff; Pia Friis; Paolo Costantino; Atle M Bones; Henrik Bjørn Nielsen; John Mundy
Journal:  Plant Physiol       Date:  2013-02-27       Impact factor: 8.340

7.  Antennae hold a key to Varroa-sensitive hygiene behaviour in honey bees.

Authors:  Fanny Mondet; Cédric Alaux; Dany Severac; Marine Rohmer; Alison R Mercer; Yves Le Conte
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-05-22       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Functional genomics bridges the gap between quantitative genetics and molecular biology.

Authors:  Tuuli Lappalainen
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 9.043

9.  Shared genes related to aggression, rather than chemical communication, are associated with reproductive dominance in paper wasps (Polistes metricus).

Authors:  Amy L Toth; John F Tooker; Srihari Radhakrishnan; Robert Minard; Michael T Henshaw; Christina M Grozinger
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 3.969

10.  Multiple evidence strands suggest that there may be as few as 19,000 human protein-coding genes.

Authors:  Iakes Ezkurdia; David Juan; Jose Manuel Rodriguez; Adam Frankish; Mark Diekhans; Jennifer Harrow; Jesus Vazquez; Alfonso Valencia; Michael L Tress
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2014-06-16       Impact factor: 6.150

View more
  2 in total

1.  Towards Differential Connectomics with NeuroVIISAS.

Authors:  Sebastian Schwanke; Jörg Jenssen; Peter Eipert; Oliver Schmitt
Journal:  Neuroinformatics       Date:  2019-01

2.  Mitochondria as environments for the nuclear genome in Drosophila: mitonuclear G×G×E.

Authors:  David M Rand; James A Mossman; Adam N Spierer; John A Santiago
Journal:  J Hered       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 2.645

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.