[BioC] Another question about dye swap

Ron Ophir ron.ophir at weizmann.ac.il
Thu Mar 2 09:06:59 CET 2006


Thanks Gordon,
I mixed up as a result of what I read in "Introductory statistic with
R" where there is an example of (section 10.2)
x<-runif(20)
y<-2*x+rnorm(20,0,0.3)
summary(lm(y~x))
gives insignificant intercept so there is a suggestion to run
summary(lm(y~x-1))

but when I run once model.matrix(y~x)
and once model.matrix(y~x-1)
I saw my mistake exactly as you said.
Ron

>>> "Gordon K Smyth" <smyth at wehi.EDU.AU> 03/01/06 11:46 PM >>>

> Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 15:02:32 +0200
> From: "Ron Ophir" <ron.ophir at weizmann.ac.il>
> Subject: [BioC] Another question about dye swap
> To: <bioconductor at stat.math.ethz.ch>
> Message-ID: <s404661c.050 at wisemail.weizmann.ac.il>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> Hi,
>>From limma user guide section 8.1.2 Simple comparisons -> Dye swaps
it
> is clear that for the following experimental design:
> FileName Cy3 Cy5
> File1        wt mu
> File2        mu wt
> File3        wt mu
> File4        mu wt
> *(four replicates of two groups (wt , mu) of which two replicates in
> each group is labeled by one color(red) the other two is labeled by
> another color (green))
> one can estimate the Dye effect by defining that effect as the
> intercept :
>  design <- cbind(DyeEffect=1,MUvsWT=c(1,-1,1,-1))
>  fit <- lmFit(MA, design)
>  fit <- eBayes(fit)
>
> Let's say that one finds that the Dye effect (for all genes) is
> statisticaly insignificant. Would it be correct than to force the
model
> to go through the intercept by
>
> design <- cbind(DyeEffect=-1,MUvsWT=c(1,-1,1,-1))
>
> Will I get a better estimation of the Mu to wt ratio?
>
> Thanks,
> Ron

No.  The code you give does not force the model through the intercept
and would give erroneous
estimates.  Simply omitting the DyeEffect column does what you want.

Gordon



More information about the Bioconductor mailing list