Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32182235›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2020

Methods detecting rhythmic gene expression are biologically relevant only for strong signal.

David Laloum, Marc Robinson-Rechavi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Single-Cell Multiomic Analysis of Circadian Rhythmicity in Mouse Liver.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  7. Time to start taking time seriously: how to investigate unexpected biological rhythms within infectious disease research.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Detecting Rhythmic Gene Expression in Single Cell Transcriptomics.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Circadian regulation of pulmonary disease: the importance of timing.Clinical science (London, England : 1979) · 2023
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Dominant constraints on the evolution of rhythmic gene expression.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2023
    Article
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

2 authors.

David LaloumDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, Batiment Biophore, Quartier UNIL-Sorge, Université de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7600-6527
Marc Robinson-RechaviDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, Batiment Biophore, Quartier UNIL-Sorge, Université de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3437-3329

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The nycthemeral transcriptome embodies all genes displaying a rhythmic variation of their mRNAs periodically every 24 hours, including but not restricted to circadian genes. In this study, we show that the nycthemeral rhythmicity at the gene expression level is biologically functional and that this functionality is more conserved between orthologous genes than between random genes. We used this conservation of the rhythmic expression to assess the ability of seven methods (ARSER, Lomb Scargle, RAIN, JTK, empirical-JTK, GeneCycle, and meta2d) to detect rhythmic signal in gene expression. We have contrasted them to a naive method, not based on rhythmic parameters. By taking into account the tissue-specificity of rhythmic gene expression and different species comparisons, we show that no method is strongly favored. The results show that these methods designed for rhythm detection, in addition to having quite similar performances, are consistent only among genes with a strong rhythm signal. Rhythmic genes defined with a standard p-value threshold of 0.01 for instance, could include genes whose rhythmicity is biologically irrelevant. Although these results were dependent on the datasets used and the evolutionary distance between the species compared, we call for caution about the results of studies reporting or using large sets of rhythmic genes. Furthermore, given the analysis of the behaviors of the methods on real and randomized data, we recommend using primarily ARS, empJTK, or GeneCycle, which verify expectations of a classical distribution of p-values. Experimental design should also take into account the circumstances under which the methods seem more efficient, such as giving priority to biological replicates over the number of time-points, or to the number of time-points over the quality of the technique (microarray vs RNAseq). GeneCycle, and to a lesser extent empirical-JTK, might be the most robust method when applied to weakly informative datasets. Finally, our analyzes suggest that rhythmic genes are mainly highly expressed genes.

Indexed as

SoftwareAnimalsCircadian RhythmComputational BiologyDatabases, GeneticDrosophilaGene Expression ProfilingHumansMiceOrgan SpecificityReproducibility of ResultsTranscriptome

Identifiers

PMID32182235
PMCPMC7100990

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.