A Comparative Study of Algorithms Detecting Differential Rhythmicity in Transcriptomic Data.

IF 2.3 Q3 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS Bioinformatics and Biology Insights Pub Date : 2024-09-24 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/11779322241281188
Lin Miao, Douglas E Weidemann, Katherine Ngo, Benjamin A Unruh, Shihoko Kojima
{"title":"A Comparative Study of Algorithms Detecting Differential Rhythmicity in Transcriptomic Data.","authors":"Lin Miao, Douglas E Weidemann, Katherine Ngo, Benjamin A Unruh, Shihoko Kojima","doi":"10.1177/11779322241281188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Rhythmic transcripts play pivotal roles in driving the daily oscillations of various biological processes. Genetic or environmental disruptions can lead to alterations in the rhythmicity of transcripts, ultimately impacting downstream circadian outputs, including metabolic processes and even behavior. To statistically compare the differences in transcript rhythms between 2 or more conditions, several algorithms have been developed to analyze circadian transcriptomic data, each with distinct features. In this study, we compared the performance of 7 algorithms that were specifically designed to detect differential rhythmicity (DODR, LimoRhyde, CircaCompare, compareRhythms, diffCircadian, dryR, and RepeatedCircadian). We found that even when applying the same statistical threshold, these algorithms yielded varying numbers of differentially rhythmic transcripts, most likely because each algorithm defines rhythmic and differentially rhythmic transcripts differently. Nevertheless, the output for the differential phase and amplitude were identical between dryR and compareRhyhms, and diffCircadian and CircaCompare, while the output from LimoRhyde2 was highly correlated with that from diffCircadian and CircaCompare. Because each algorithm has unique requirements for input data and reports different information as an output, it is crucial to ensure the compatibility of input data with the chosen algorithm and assess whether the algorithm's output fits the user's needs when selecting an algorithm for analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":9065,"journal":{"name":"Bioinformatics and Biology Insights","volume":"18 ","pages":"11779322241281188"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440551/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioinformatics and Biology Insights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11779322241281188","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rhythmic transcripts play pivotal roles in driving the daily oscillations of various biological processes. Genetic or environmental disruptions can lead to alterations in the rhythmicity of transcripts, ultimately impacting downstream circadian outputs, including metabolic processes and even behavior. To statistically compare the differences in transcript rhythms between 2 or more conditions, several algorithms have been developed to analyze circadian transcriptomic data, each with distinct features. In this study, we compared the performance of 7 algorithms that were specifically designed to detect differential rhythmicity (DODR, LimoRhyde, CircaCompare, compareRhythms, diffCircadian, dryR, and RepeatedCircadian). We found that even when applying the same statistical threshold, these algorithms yielded varying numbers of differentially rhythmic transcripts, most likely because each algorithm defines rhythmic and differentially rhythmic transcripts differently. Nevertheless, the output for the differential phase and amplitude were identical between dryR and compareRhyhms, and diffCircadian and CircaCompare, while the output from LimoRhyde2 was highly correlated with that from diffCircadian and CircaCompare. Because each algorithm has unique requirements for input data and reports different information as an output, it is crucial to ensure the compatibility of input data with the chosen algorithm and assess whether the algorithm's output fits the user's needs when selecting an algorithm for analysis.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
检测转录组数据中不同节律的算法比较研究
节律转录本在驱动各种生物过程的日常振荡中发挥着关键作用。遗传或环境干扰会导致转录本节律的改变,最终影响下游昼夜节律输出,包括代谢过程甚至行为。为了统计比较两种或多种条件下转录本节律的差异,人们开发了多种算法来分析昼夜节律转录本组数据,每种算法都具有不同的特点。在本研究中,我们比较了 7 种专门用于检测不同节律性的算法(DODR、LimoRhyde、CircaCompare、compareRhythms、diffCircadian、dryR 和 RepeatedCircadian)的性能。我们发现,即使采用相同的统计阈值,这些算法也会产生不同数量的差异节律转录本,这很可能是因为每种算法对节律和差异节律转录本的定义不同。不过,dryR 和 compareRhyhms 以及 diffCircadian 和 CircaCompare 的差异相位和振幅输出是相同的,而 LimoRhyde2 的输出与 diffCircadian 和 CircaCompare 的输出高度相关。由于每种算法对输入数据都有独特的要求,输出报告的信息也不尽相同,因此在选择算法进行分析时,确保输入数据与所选算法的兼容性以及评估算法输出是否符合用户需求至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Bioinformatics and Biology Insights
Bioinformatics and Biology Insights BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS-
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
1.70%
发文量
36
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Bioinformatics and Biology Insights is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on bioinformatics methods and their applications which must pertain to biological insights. All papers should be easily amenable to biologists and as such help bridge the gap between theories and applications.
期刊最新文献
Cliotide U1, a Novel Antimicrobial Peptide Isolated From Urtica Dioica Leaves. Resistify: A Novel NLR Classifier That Reveals Helitron-Associated NLR Expansion in Solanaceae. Advancing Regulatory Genomics With Machine Learning. Bioinformatic Annotation of Transposon DNA Processing Genes on the Long-Read Genome Assembly of Caenorhabditis elegans. Comprehensive Analysis of CRISPR-Cas Systems and Their Influence on Antibiotic Resistance in Salmonella enterica Strains.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1