[BioC] Illumina beadlevel expression data

Ina Hoeschele inah at vt.edu
Fri Nov 16 15:16:45 CET 2007


Matt Ritchie wrote:
> Dear Ina,
>
> I'd suggest that you use the values in the text files (useImages=FALSE) as
> these look reasonable, whereas the ones obtained from redoing the image
> analysis look strange.  The values in the text file are already background
> corrected (foreground - background).
>   
yes, although that way I am getting quite a few (actually a lot) of 
negative G values, then my only choices are to apply the 'minimum' or 
'half' methods myself (but not others such as RMA that I wanted to try).
> As I mentioned in previous emails, if you send me the data off-list, I can
> take a closer look to try and work out what is going on.
>   
the folder containing all files for the 12 arrays of one Beadchip are at 
http://staff.vbi.vt.edu/inah/1814647013/

Thanks, Matt!
Ina
> Best wishes,
>
> Matt
>
> On 15/11/07 23:39, "Ina Hoeschele" <inah at vt.edu> wrote:
>
>   
>> Matt Ritchie wrote:
>>     
>>> Dear Ina,
>>>
>>> I'm sorry to say that I haven't seen values like this before, and the X and
>>> Y coordinates don't look unusual.  I have 2 further suggestions...
>>>
>>> 1.  Try running readIllumina with useImages=FALSE to see the values BeadScan
>>> calculated for each bead.  Are they also negative?  Note that these will be
>>> background corrected, so Gb will be set to 0 in BLData.
>>>   
>>>       
>> those values are different but still look strange to me (were they
>> computed using the subtract or minimum method for background
>> correction?) - here they are:
>>     
>>> BLData[[1]][1:10,]
>>>       
>>    ProbeID   G Gb      GrnX      GrnY
>> 1    10008  56  0 1556.7592 13526.200
>> 2    10008  46  0 1713.2862 17711.700
>> 3    10008   4  0   45.9317  6676.658
>> 4    10008  37  0 1401.8142  2153.181
>> 5    10008  48  0 2078.2252 15974.100
>> 6    10008  65  0 1193.8842  8654.250
>> 7    10008 129  0   45.0026 13990.970
>> 8    10008  63  0  542.1487 14834.780
>> 9    10008  24  0 1341.1462 13791.170
>> 10   10008  45  0 1312.7072  7549.003
>>     
>>> BLData[[1]][300000:300010,]
>>>       
>>        ProbeID  G Gb      GrnX      GrnY
>> 300000 2140131  4  0 1258.9752 17301.580
>> 300001 2140131  4  0  398.1137  6108.199
>> 300002 2140131  0  0 2094.6222 16298.300
>> 300003 2140131  3  0  642.9227  2094.740
>> 300004 2140131  0  0 1352.2322  6294.191
>> 300005 2140131 -1  0 1104.5312 14069.740
>> 300006 2140131 22  0  963.8952  9653.909
>> 300007 2140131  2  0  161.5619 14317.910
>> 300008 2140131  0  0 1515.5492 13932.460
>> 300009 2140131  0  0 1934.0542 15118.710
>> 300010 2140131 -1  0  177.0217 16717.080
>>     
>>> 2.  Upgrade to R 2.6.0 and beadarray 1.6.0 (the C code in readIllumina
>>> changed recently).  Do you still see strange values?  In future emails, it
>>> would be helpful to include the output from sessionInfo().
>>>   
>>>       
>> I did upgrade to R-2.6.0 and beadarray 1.6.0  and I am getting the exact
>> same strange values! Here is the output from sessionInfo().
>>     
>>> sessionInfo()
>>>       
>> R version 2.6.0 (2007-10-03)
>> i386-pc-mingw32
>>
>> locale:
>> LC_COLLATE=English_United States.1252;LC_CTYPE=English_United
>> States.1252;LC_MONETARY=English_United
>> States.1252;LC_NUMERIC=C;LC_TIME=English_United States.1252
>>
>> attached base packages:
>> [1] tools     stats     graphics  grDevices utils     datasets  methods
>> [8] base    
>>
>> other attached packages:
>>  [1] beadarray_1.6.0      affy_1.16.0          preprocessCore_1.0.0
>>  [4] affyio_1.6.1         geneplotter_1.16.0   lattice_0.16-5
>>  [7] annotate_1.16.1      xtable_1.5-2         AnnotationDbi_1.0.6
>> [10] RSQLite_0.6-4        DBI_0.2-4            Biobase_1.16.1
>> [13] limma_2.12.0
>>
>> loaded via a namespace (and not attached):
>> [1] grid_2.6.0         KernSmooth_2.22-21 RColorBrewer_1.0-2
>>  
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>>> If this doesn't uncover anything, perhaps you can send me the data off list
>>> so that I can take a closer look.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Matt
>>>
>>> On 15/11/07 15:10, "Ina Hoeschele" <inah at vt.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Thank you, Matt.
>>>>
>>>> Matt Ritchie wrote:
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> Hi Ina,
>>>>>
>>>>> What version of beadarray are you using?  In older versions funny
>>>>> background
>>>>> values have been reported on some operating systems - this should be fixed
>>>>> on the release version though (beadarray 1.6.0 available on R-2.6.0).
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> I am using R-2.5.1 (not sure what version of beadarray), which is still
>>>> the current released version. Do I have to go to R-2.6.0?
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> The first beads in BLData are typically ones which could not be decoded
>>>>> properly (ProbeIDs 0).  If these beads are too close to the edge of an
>>>>> image, or off the image, then zero foreground or background intensities may
>>>>> occur.  Check the X (GrnX) and Y (GrnY) coordinates for these beads - any
>>>>> with negative values are off the image, and cannot be quantified.
>>>>>
>>>>> BLData[[1]][1:10,]
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> I have a total of 319952 beads. So I printed the information for the
>>>> first 10 and for 10 others towards the end. Even for the first 10 beads
>>>> the GrnX and GrnY are not negative. Here it is.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>>  BLData[[1]][1:10,]
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>>    ProbeID          G Gb      GrnX      GrnY
>>>> 1    10008  0.0000000  0 1556.7592 13526.200
>>>> 2    10008  2.5249867  0 1713.2862 17711.700
>>>> 3    10008 -0.0359710  0   45.9317  6676.658
>>>> 4    10008  0.0000000  0 1401.8142  2153.181
>>>> 5    10008  0.0000000  0 2078.2252 15974.100
>>>> 6    10008 -6.8111267  0 1193.8842  8654.250
>>>> 7    10008  0.0000000  0   45.0026 13990.970
>>>> 8    10008 77.2345222  0  542.1487 14834.780
>>>> 9    10008 -0.8237067  0 1341.1462 13791.170
>>>> 10   10008 -0.2324444  0 1312.7072  7549.003
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>>  BLData[[1]][300000:300010,]
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>>        ProbeID           G Gb      GrnX      GrnY
>>>> 300000 2140131  0.00000000  0 1258.9752 17301.580
>>>> 300001 2140131 -0.24859133  0  398.1137  6108.199
>>>> 300002 2140131 -0.07388444  0 2094.6222 16298.300
>>>> 300003 2140131  0.00000000  0  642.9227  2094.740
>>>> 300004 2140131 11.67171933  0 1352.2322  6294.191
>>>> 300005 2140131  0.00000000  0 1104.5312 14069.740
>>>> 300006 2140131 -0.15372500  0  963.8952  9653.909
>>>> 300007 2140131  0.00000000  0  161.5619 14317.910
>>>> 300008 2140131 -0.08331556  0 1515.5492 13932.460
>>>> 300009 2140131  0.61296444  0 1934.0542 15118.710
>>>> 300010 2140131  0.00000000  0  177.0217 16717.080
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> If this doesn't shed any light, perhaps you can put the .tif and .txt files
>>>>> from the strip online so that I can take a closer look.
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> I'll do that next if you don't have any other suggestions.
>>>> Many thanks for your time.
>>>> Ina
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>
>>>>> Matt
>>>>>
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>    I am new to the analysis of Illumina beadlevel expression data. I
>>>>>> have data from a collaborator and have started to work with the data on
>>>>>> the first Beadchip (with 12 arrays or strips).  These are single channel
>>>>>> data. I am using the beadarray package.  I read the data in as follows:
>>>>>> BLData <- 
>>>>>> readIllumina(textType=".txt",useImages=TRUE,singleChannel=TRUE,imageManipu
>>>>>> la
>>>>>> ti
>>>>>> on="sharpen",
>>>>>> backgroundSize=17,storeXY=TRUE,metrics=FALSE,backgroundMethod="none",offse
>>>>>> t=
>>>>>> 0,
>>>>>> normalizeMethod="none")
>>>>>> Note: above I'm doing NO background correction and note that I use
>>>>>> backgroundSize=17.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then I looked at the data:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> an <- arrayNames(BLData)
>>>>>> BLData at beadData[[an[1]]]$G[1:10]
>>>>>>  [1]  0.0000000  2.5249867 -0.0359710  0.0000000  0.0000000 -6.8111267
>>>>>>  [7]  0.0000000 77.2345222 -0.8237067 -0.2324444
>>>>>> BLData at beadData[[an[1]]]$Gb[1:10]
>>>>>>  [1] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> so I get quite a few G intensities that are zero and ALL of my
>>>>>> background intensities are zero - why is that ?????
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then I created BLData with backgroundSize=4 and backgroundSize=40 (not
>>>>>> knowing what value I should be using ?????). For backgroundSize=4, I
>>>>>> find that
>>>>>> BLData at beadData[[an[1]]]$Gb[1:100]
>>>>>>   [1] -1  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0
>>>>>> 0  0  0
>>>>>>  [26]  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  2  0
>>>>>> 0  0  0
>>>>>>  [51]  0  0 24  2  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0
>>>>>> 0  0  0
>>>>>>  [76]  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0 19  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0
>>>>>> 0  0  0
>>>>>> so now I still have many zero Gb values, but also some nonzero ones and
>>>>>> even negative (-1)???
>>>>>> But when I use backgroundSize=40, then R crashes (repeatedly).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And when I create BLData with backgroundMethod="minimum" and
>>>>>> backgroundSize=17, then I find the following G intensities:
>>>>>> BLData at beadData[[an[1]]]$G[1:10]
>>>>>>  [1] 2.425286e-12 2.524987e+00 2.425286e-12 2.425286e-12 2.425286e-12
>>>>>> 2.425286e-12 2.425286e-12 7.723452e+01 2.425286e-12
>>>>>> [10] 2.425286e-12
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These G and Gb values all look suspect to me - can someone please help?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many thanks, Ina
>>>>>>         
>>>>>>



More information about the Bioconductor mailing list