Multi-factor time series design model in DESeq2 analysis

Question: Multi-factor time series design model in DESeq2 analysis

5.6 years ago by

United States

prppmet • 0 wrote:

I have the following data: a). 3 strains (wild type & two mutants); b). 2 conditions: untreated & treated; c). 3 time points (min): 0, 15, 90. Each time point , except for 0 time point (base line control), has untreated & treated samples. There two replicates for each condition+time point.

   strain   treatment   time   replicate   id
S1.1   SC5314-wt   untr   0   r1   SC5314-wt_untr_0_r1
S2.6   SC5314-wt   untr   0   r2   SC5314-wt_untr_0_r2
S1.2   SC5314-wt   untr   15   r1   SC5314-wt_untr_15_r1
S2.7   SC5314-wt   untr   15   r2   SC5314-wt_untr_15_r2
S1.3   SC5314-wt   trt   15   r1   SC5314-wt_trt_15_r1
S2.8   SC5314-wt   trt   15   r2   SC5314-wt_trt_15_r2
S1.4   SC5314-wt   untr   90   r1   SC5314-wt_untr_90_r1
S2.9   SC5314-wt   untr   90   r2   SC5314-wt_untr_90_r2
S1.5   SC5314-wt   trt   90   r1   SC5314-wt_trt_90_r1
S2.10   SC5314-wt   trt   90   r2   SC5314-wt_trt_90_r2

IR1.11   irs4-mut   untr   0   r1   irs4-mut_untr_0_r1
IR2.16   irs4-mut   untr   0   r2   irs4-mut_untr_0_r2
IR1.12   irs4-mut   untr   15   r1   irs4-mut_untr_15_r1
IR2.17   irs4-mut   untr   15   r2   irs4-mut_untr_15_r2
IR1.13   irs4-mut   trt   15   r1   irs4-mut_trt_15_r1
IR2.18   irs4-mut   trt   15   r2   irs4-mut_trt_15_r2
IR1.14   irs4-mut   untr   90   r1   irs4-mut_untr_90_r1
IR2.19   irs4-mut   untr   90   r2   irs4-mut_untr_90_r2
IR1.15   irs4-mut   trt   90   r1   irs4-mut_trt_90_r1
IR2.20   irs4-mut   trt   90   r2   irs4-mut_trt_90_r2

IN1.21   inp51-mut   untr   0   r1   inp51-mut_untr_0_r1
IN2.26   inp51-mut   untr   0   r2   inp51-mut_untr_0_r2
IN1.22   inp51-mut   untr   15   r1   inp51-mut_untr_15_r1
IN2.27   inp51-mut   untr   15   r2   inp51-mut_untr_15_r2
IN1.23   inp51-mut   trt   15   r1   inp51-mut_trt_15_r1
IN2.28   inp51-mut   trt   15   r2   inp51-mut_trt_15_r2
IN1.24   inp51-mut   untr   90   r1   inp51-mut_untr_90_r1
IN2.29   inp51-mut   untr   90   r2   inp51-mut_untr_90_r2
IN1.25   inp51-mut   trt   90   r1   inp51-mut_trt_90_r1
IN2.30   inp51-mut   trt   90   r2   inp51-mut_trt_90_r2

Did the following: with DESeq2_1.6.3

> sampledata$time <- factor(sampledata$time,levels = c("0", "15", "90"))
> sampledata$sample <- factor (paste0(sampledata$strain,"_", sampledata$treatment))
> sampledata$sample
[1] SC5314-wt_untr SC5314-wt_untr SC5314-wt_untr SC5314-wt_untr SC5314-wt_trt SC5314-wt_trt SC5314-wt_untr SC5314-wt_untr SC5314-wt_trt SC5314-wt_trt irs4-mut_untr irs4-mut_untr irs4-mut_untr
[14] irs4-mut_untr irs4-mut_trt irs4-mut_trt irs4-mut_untr irs4-mut_untr irs4-mut_trt irs4-mut_trt inp51-mut_untr inp51-mut_untr inp51-mut_untr inp51-mut_untr inp51-mut_trt inp51-mut_trt
[27] inp51-mut_untr inp51-mut_untr inp51-mut_trt inp51-mut_trt
Levels: inp51-mut_trt inp51-mut_untr irs4-mut_trt irs4-mut_untr SC5314-wt_trt SC5314-wt_untr

> sampledata$time
[1] 0 0 15 15 15 15 90 90 90 90 0 0 15 15 15 15 90 90 90 90 0 0 15 15 15 15 90 90 90 90
Levels: 0 15 90

#failed with the design:
> ddsCATS <- DESeqDataSetFromMatrix(countData = countsdata, colData = sampledata,design = ~ sample + time + sample:time)
Error in DESeqDataSet(se, design = design, ignoreRank) :
the model matrix is not full rank, so the model cannot be fit as specified.
one or more variables or interaction terms in the design formula
are linear combinations of the others and must be removed

# this worked
> ddsCATS <- DESeqDataSetFromMatrix(countData = countsdata, colData = sampledata,design = ~ sample + time)
#define factor level references

> ddsCATS$sample <- relevel (ddsCATS$sample, "SC5314-wt_untr")
> ddsCATS$time <- relevel (ddsCATS$time, "0")

#LRT test
> ddsCATS <- DESeq(ddsCATS, test="LRT", reduced = ~ time)
> resddsCATS <- results(ddsCATS)

> resultsNames(ddsCATS)
[1] "Intercept" "sampleinp51.mut_untr" "sampleirs4.mut_trt" "sampleirs4.mut_untr" "sampleSC5314.wt_trt" "sampleSC5314.wt_untr" "time_15_vs_0" "time_90_vs_0"

> resddsCATS <- results(ddsCATS)
> resddsCATS
log2 fold change (MLE): time 90 vs 0
LRT p-value: '~ sample + time' vs '~ time'
DataFrame with 8051 rows and 6 columns
baseMean log2FoldChange lfcSE stat pvalue padj
<numeric> <numeric> <numeric> <numeric> <numeric> <numeric>
C2_00990W_A 0.02556151 0.88717584 4.894719 0.3568103 0.9964362 NA
C2_00990W_B 0.02556151 0.88717584 4.894719 0.3568103 0.9964362 NA
C2_02640C_B 0.02976336 0.02591547 4.919825 0.4767291 0.9929506 NA
C3_04310C_A 0.03574418 -0.61652583 4.918296 0.5500559 0.9901756 NA
C3_06300W_B 0.03094594 0.13771721 4.919847 0.4435255 0.9940455 NA
... ... ... ... ... ... ...
C2_01000W_B 23247.92 -0.4226896 0.1487500 2.368988 0.7960833 0.9354503
C2_03270W_A 32929.48 -0.4830989 0.2028736 2.764650 0.7362141 0.9142012
C2_03270W_B 37671.48 -0.4933234 0.1991737 5.960478 0.3100836 0.6393959
C5_05050W_A 60685.44 -0.4559260 0.1654281 3.772222 0.5826539 0.8407806
C5_05050W_B 80734.06 -0.4962704 0.1552556 4.574513 0.4699761 0.7663622

Questions: 1). I would like to compare the effect of each condition at each time point both within and between three strains. what should be the full and reduced design terms for LRT test? 2). how do I setup contrasts to compare conditions at different time points both within and across the strains? 3). Lastly, what happened to sampleinp51.mut_trt as resultsNames(ddsCATS) does not list it?

Thanks.

rna-seq • 2.4k views

ADD COMMENT • link •

modified 7 days ago by Biostar ♦♦ 20 • written 5.6 years ago by prppmet • 0

5.6 years ago by

Devon Ryan ♦ 98k

Freiburg, Germany

Devon Ryan ♦ 98k wrote:

Don't use an LRT, use a wald test. Further, it's simplest to just reparamaterize things so you just have groups (e.g., SC5314-wt_untr_15 and SC5314-wt_trt_15) and just specify a different contrast for each of the comparisons you want to make. A GLM style design could still be used, but figuring out the contrasts becomes a pain then.
If you use groups then this is significantly simpler. Only use a model like the one you did if you really want to test that model (e.g., see the effect of treatment across time).
It's the base level of the comparison. By default, all of the coefficients will be versus it.

ADD COMMENT • link written 5.6 years ago by Devon Ryan ♦ 98k

Thanks for the suggestions on the Wald test being the more appropriate choice for analysis of this data. I will follow your advice. I am still not clear on how sampleinp51.mut_trt was picked as the refernece level for sample factors despite my explicit selection of SC5314-wt_untr as the reference [ddsCATS$sample <- relevel (ddsCATS$sample, "SC5314-wt_untr")]. If I recall from DESeq2 manual, the last level of the factor is selected by default if no relevel is declared by the user. Here I selected two relevels separately for the two factors considered in the analysis, sample & time, in that order. It seems the last declaration in the sequence (ddsCATS$time <- relevel (ddsCATS$time, "0") is considered but not the sample reference. Do I understand this correctly? If not, how do I select SC5314-wt_untr as one of the two reference levels? On the other hand, if I combine all factors into a compound one as you suggested for Wald test, I only need to select one - SC5314-wt_untr_0. I would still like to know why the two relevel selection did not work for me. I appreciate the response.

ADD REPLY • link written 5.6 years ago by prppmet • 0

I don't know why the relevel didn't work, you can always just relevel sampledata$sample before making ddsCATS.

ADD REPLY • link written 5.6 years ago by Devon Ryan ♦ 98k

The DESeqResults object has log2fold changes for only the 1st & last levels of the factor. For the rest, I can use contrast argument of the results function to generate that data. However I would like to know, since I have 15 different levels & want to generate a diagonal (15 X 15) log2-foldchange matrix, if there is an automated option to do just that within R. Any pointers will be appreciated.

ADD REPLY • link written 5.6 years ago by prppmet • 0

There's not a single command that will do that (that I know of, at least), but you could script it in a loop.

ADD REPLY • link written 5.6 years ago by Devon Ryan ♦ 98k

Similar posts • Search »