Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23837715›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2013

TCC: an R package for comparing tag count data with robust normalization strategies.

Jianqiang Sun, Tomoaki Nishiyama, Kentaro Shimizu, Koji Kadota

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 352 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
352citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

352 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Science advances · 2023
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Genetic analysis ofiScience · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

292 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jianqiang SunGraduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo, 1-1-1 Yayoi, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan.
Tomoaki Nishiyama
Kentaro Shimizu
Koji Kadota

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDifferential expression analysis based on "next-generation" sequencing technologies is a fundamental means of studying RNA expression. We recently developed a multi-step normalization method (called TbT) for two-group RNA-seq data with replicates and demonstrated that the statistical methods available in four R packages (edgeR, DESeq, baySeq, and NBPSeq) together with TbT can produce a well-ranked gene list in which true differentially expressed genes (DEGs) are top-ranked and non-DEGs are bottom ranked. However, the advantages of the current TbT method come at the cost of a huge computation time. Moreover, the R packages did not have normalization methods based on such a multi-step strategy.

resultsTCC (an acronym for Tag Count Comparison) is an R package that provides a series of functions for differential expression analysis of tag count data. The package incorporates multi-step normalization methods, whose strategy is to remove potential DEGs before performing the data normalization. The normalization function based on this DEG elimination strategy (DEGES) includes (i) the original TbT method based on DEGES for two-group data with or without replicates, (ii) much faster methods for two-group data with or without replicates, and (iii) methods for multi-group comparison. TCC provides a simple unified interface to perform such analyses with combinations of functions provided by edgeR, DESeq, and baySeq. Additionally, a function for generating simulation data under various conditions and alternative DEGES procedures consisting of functions in the existing packages are provided. Bioinformatics scientists can use TCC to evaluate their methods, and biologists familiar with other R packages can easily learn what is done in TCC.

conclusionDEGES in TCC is essential for accurate normalization of tag count data, especially when up- and down-regulated DEGs in one of the samples are extremely biased in their number. TCC is useful for analyzing tag count data in various scenarios ranging from unbiased to extremely biased differential expression. TCC is available at http://www.iu.a.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~kadota/TCC/ and will appear in Bioconductor (http://bioconductor.org/) from ver. 2.13.

Indexed as

High-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingSequence Analysis, RNASoftwareAnimalsArabidopsis ProteinsGene Expression ProfilingHumansMiceRNA-Dependent RNA PolymeraseArabidopsis ProteinsRDR6 protein, ArabidopsisRNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase

Identifiers

PMID23837715
PMCPMC3716788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.