The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Use of within-array replicate spots for assessing differential expression in microarray experiments
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Spotted arrays are often printed with probes in duplicate or triplicate, but current methods for assessing differential expression are not able to make full use of the resulting information. The usual practice is to average the duplicate or triplicate results for each probe before assessing differential expression. This results in the loss of valuable information about genewise variability. RESULTS: A method is proposed for extracting more information from within-array replicate spots in microarray experiments by estimating the strength of the correlation between them. The method involves fitting separate linear models to the expression data for each gene but with a common value for the between-replicate correlation. The method greatly improves the precision with which the genewise variances are estimated and thereby improves inference methods designed to identify differentially expressed genes. The method may be combined with empirical Bayes methods for moderating the genewise variances between genes. The method is validated using data from a microarray experiment involving calibration and ratio control spots in conjunction with spiked-in RNA. Comparing results for calibration and ratio control spots shows that the common correlation method results in substantially better discrimination of differentially expressed genes from those which are not. The spike-in experiment also confirms that the results may be further improved by empirical Bayes smoothing of the variances when the sample size is small. AVAILABILITY: The methodology is implemented in the limma software package for R, available from the CRAN repository http://www.r-project.org
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Smyth, G. K. (2004) · Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology · doi:10.2202/1544-6115.1027 · Cited by 11,829
Self-citationMixed-Effects Models in S and S-PLUS
(2001) · Technometrics · doi:10.1198/tech.2001.s574 · Cited by 9,278
Cited by
limma powers differential expression analyses for RNA-sequencing and microarray studies
Ritchie, M. E., Phipson, B., Wu, D., Hu, Y., Law, C. W., Shi, W., & Smyth, G. K. (2015) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkv007 · Cited by 40,458
Self-citationvoom: precision weights unlock linear model analysis tools for RNA-seq read counts
Law, C. W., Chen, Y., Shi, W., & Smyth, G. K. (2014) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2014-15-2-r29 · Cited by 6,155
Self-citationlimma: Linear Models for Microarray Data
Smyth, G. K. (2005) · Statistics for Biology and Health · doi:10.1007/0-387-29362-0_23 · Cited by 5,796
Self-citationProgrammed cell senescence during mammalian embryonic development
Muñoz-Espín, D., Cañamero, M., Maraver, A., Gómez-López, G., Contreras, J., Murillo-Cuesta, S., Rodríguez-Baeza, A., Varela-Nieto, I., Ruberte, J., Collado, M., et al. (2013) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2013.10.019 · Cited by 1,428
Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab), Savas, P., Virassamy, B., Ye, C., Salim, A., Mintoff, C. P., Caramia, F., Salgado, R., Byrne, D. J., Teo, Z. L., et al. (2018) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0078-7 · Cited by 992
Metadata
- Authors
- Smyth, G. K., Michaud, J., & Scott, H. S.
- Venue
- Bioinformatics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-01-18
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2067-2075
- ISSN
- 0266-7061 (ISSN-L)
- 1367-4803
- 1460-2059
- OpenAlex
- W2142415307
- Cited by
- 1,405
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 19.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.