You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi Johannes,
I was wondering whether or not you have already thought about a suitable approach to use normR/diffR for differential analysis with several replicates per condition (aside from the obvious "all vs all" and a merge on the level of results) - the examples in the package vignette seem to suggest that this is not possible at the moment. Is there any "hidden" functionality in the package that enables one to do that in a straightforward manner?
Best,
Peter
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I am sorry. Until now, there is no "hidden" functionality that enables this feature. However, it was already requested by some people.
Aside from the merge of individual replicate results (which seems to be quite convenient in most cases), we are currently investigating if a differential analysis on the level of normR-estimated enrichment (getEnrichment(fit)) is feasible. I will report back on this issue.
That's good to hear that people are interested in using replicates in normR. Apparently we have ideas for this function but there is no schedule on when that feature will be available. I keep this issue posted.
For further development on this task see this publication which uses normR for binarization of histone modification signals to segment the chromatin for the identification of active TUs using transcription-associated histone modifications:
Sahu, A., Li, N., Dunkel, I. et al. EPIGENE: genome-wide transcription unit annotation using a multivariate probabilistic model of histone modifications. Epigenetics & Chromatin 13, 20 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13072-020-00341-z
Hi Johannes,
I was wondering whether or not you have already thought about a suitable approach to use normR/diffR for differential analysis with several replicates per condition (aside from the obvious "all vs all" and a merge on the level of results) - the examples in the package vignette seem to suggest that this is not possible at the moment. Is there any "hidden" functionality in the package that enables one to do that in a straightforward manner?
Best,
Peter
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: