Cited by 497Gene expression and cancer classificationGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics

RNA-seq differential expression studies: more sequence or more replication?

Open access
Liu, Yuwen, Zhou, Jie, White, Kevin P.·2014·Bioinformatics

Abstract

Motivation: RNA-seq is replacing microarrays as the primary tool for gene expression studies. Many RNA-seq studies have used insufficient biological replicates, resulting in low statistical power and inefficient use of sequencing resources. Results: We show the explicit trade-off between more biological replicates and deeper sequencing in increasing power to detect differentially expressed (DE) genes. In the human cell line MCF7, adding more sequencing depth after 10 M reads gives diminishing returns on power to detect DE genes, whereas adding biological replicates improves power significantly regardless of sequencing depth. We also propose a cost-effectiveness metric for guiding the design of large-scale RNA-seq DE studies. Our analysis showed that sequencing less reads and performing more biological replication is an effective strategy to increase power and accuracy in large-scale differential expression RNA-seq studies, and provided new insights into efficient experiment design of RNA-seq studies. Availability and implementation: The code used in this paper is provided on: http://home.uchicago.edu/∼jiezhou/replication/. The expression data is deposited in the Gene Expression Omnibus under the accession ID GSE51403. Contact: kpwhite@uchicago.edu Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt688

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Increasing sequencing depth can improve statistical power for lowly expressed genes, and for any given sample there is a sequencing level at which further power improvement is best achieved by increasing replicate number.

    “Increasing sequencing depth also can improve statistical power for lowly expressed genes [10, 194], and for any given sample there exists a level of sequencing at which power improvement is best achieved by increasing the number of replicates [195].”

    From A survey of best practices for RNA-seq data analysis (2016) · cites this paper as [195]

  • In most experiments, biological variability is greater than technical variability, so biological replicates are of greater value than technical replicates.

    “In most experiments, biological variability is greater than technical variability, so biological replicates are of greater value than technical replicates174,175,219.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liu, Y., Zhou, J., & White, K. P.
Affiliations
University of Chicago (US)
Corresponding author
White, Kevin P.
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2013-12-04
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
301-304
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
OpenAlex
W2127372456
Cited by
497
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 49 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 23
FWCI
20.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioinformatics (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Chicago Community Trust
  • Chicago Biomedical Consortium
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (P50GM081892)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Keywords
RNA-seq, differential gene expression, biological replicates, sequencing depth, statistical power, experimental design, cost-effectiveness, MCF-7 cells
MeSH terms
Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Sample Size, Gene Expression Profiling, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing, MCF-7 Cells

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