Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

technical replicates #220

Open
animesh opened this issue Dec 21, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

technical replicates #220

animesh opened this issue Dec 21, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@animesh
Copy link

animesh commented Dec 21, 2023

Description of the bug

not sure how to handle technical replicates in contrast file? i have a samples.csv like one presented at https://nf-co.re/differentialabundance/1.4.0/docs/usage but with one more column (tech) representing technical replicate

sample|fastq_1|fastq_2|condition|replicate|tech|batch
CONTROL_REP1T1|AEG588A1_S1_L002_R1_001.fastq.gz|AEG588A1_S1_L002_R2_001.fastq.gz|control|1|1|A
CONTROL_REP1T2|AEG588A1_S1_L003_R1_001.fastq.gz|AEG588A1_S1_L003_R2_001.fastq.gz|control|1|2|B
CONTROL_REP1T3|AEG588A1_S1_L004_R1_001.fastq.gz|AEG588A1_S1_L004_R2_001.fastq.gz|control|1|3|A
...
TROL_REPNT1|AEG588AN_S1_L002_R1_001.fastq.gz|AEG588A1_S1_L002_R2_001.fastq.gz|trol|1|1|A
TROL_REPNT2|AEG588AN_S1_L003_R1_001.fastq.gz|AEG588A1_S1_L003_R2_001.fastq.gz|trol|1|2|B
TROL_REPNT3|AEG588AN_S1_L004_R1_001.fastq.gz|AEG588A1_S1_L004_R2_001.fastq.gz|trol|1|3|A

but i am not sure what should be the best way to present this information in
contrasts.csv?

Command used and terminal output

No response

Relevant files

No response

System information

No response

@animesh animesh added the bug Something isn't working label Dec 21, 2023
@pinin4fjords pinin4fjords added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation and removed bug Something isn't working labels Jan 8, 2024
@pinin4fjords
Copy link
Member

Assuming this is RNA-seq, we would normally expect technical replicates (assumed to mean multiple sequencing runs of the same biological sample) to have been collapsed in the upstream analysis- see https://nf-co.re/rnaseq/3.13.2#usage.

Do you have reason to handle individual tech reps separately?

The DESeq2 module in nf-core doesn't currently have capability for collapsing the tech reps there, so that would need addressing before we could handle them as part of this workflow.

@animesh
Copy link
Author

animesh commented Jan 8, 2024

Thanks @pinin4fjords for the response. I just wanted to see how well the tech-reps are clustering and they were clustering quite well 👍🏽 So i tried to merge the counts by summing and presented the sum of tech-reps as bio-rep in contrast for RNA-seq pipeline, which seems to have worked 🤞 Probably this process can be part of pipeline itself?

@pinin4fjords pinin4fjords added enhancement New feature or request and removed documentation Improvements or additions to documentation labels Jan 10, 2024
@pinin4fjords
Copy link
Member

Thanks- we'll consider taking matrices with unmerged tech reps in future development.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants