Question: WGCNA Different Module Results
gravatar for ninabhatia3
9 months ago by
ninabhatia30 wrote:

I'm using WGCNA to find gene modules- I've been using both the code from and from here and I am getting different results in the number of modules/module sizes. Can anyone explain these discrepancies.

rna-seq R • 471 views
ADD COMMENTlink modified 9 months ago by Sam2.6k • written 9 months ago by ninabhatia30
gravatar for Sam
9 months ago by
New York
Sam2.6k wrote:

One of the step of WGCNA involves hierachical clustering, which is partially random. Unless you've set the random seed before each run, you'd expect to see slight difference in the number of modules, module size and module membership, especially when your sample size is relatively small

ADD COMMENTlink written 9 months ago by Sam2.6k

Thank you so much!

Do you know why the Hovarth code uses this command : dynamicMods = cutreeDynamic(dendro = geneTree, distM = dissTOM, method="hybrid", deepSplit = 2, pamRespectsDendro = FALSE, minClusterSize = minModuleSize); when creating modules stepwise as opposed to this command used in the Harvard version: dynamicMods = cutreeDynamic(dendro = geneTree, method="tree", minClusterSize = minModuleSize);

I ask because using the different commands gives me a vastly different amounts of modules.

ADD REPLYlink written 9 months ago by ninabhatia30

I'm not sure. But from the glance of it, those two codes are using two different method (tree vs hybrid). So I am not surprise that they generate a different result

ADD REPLYlink written 9 months ago by Sam2.6k
Please log in to add an answer.


Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Powered by Biostar version 2.3.0
Traffic: 1281 users visited in the last hour