Researcher profile

Daniel Stoebel

Daniel Stoebel contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2016arXiv

Selecting between-sample RNA-Seq normalization methods from the perspective of their assumptions

RNA-Seq is a widely-used method for studying the behavior of genes under different biological conditions. An essential step in an RNA-Seq study is normalization, in which raw data are adjusted to account for factors that prevent direct comparison of expression measures. Errors in normalization can have a significant impact on downstream analysis, such as inflated false positives in differential expression analysis. An under-emphasized feature of normalization is the assumptions upon which the methods rely and how the validity of these assumptions can have a substantial impact on the performance of the methods. In this paper, we explain how assumptions provide the link between raw RNA-Seq read counts and meaningful measures of gene expression. We examine normalization methods from the perspective of their assumptions, as an understanding of methodological assumptions is necessary for choosing methods appropriate for the data at hand. Furthermore, we discuss why normalization methods perform poorly when their assumptions are violated and how this causes problems in subsequent analysis. To analyze a biological experiment, researchers must select a normalization method with assumptions that are met and that produces a meaningful measure of expression for the given experiment.

preprint2014arXiv

Differential expression analysis for multiple conditions

As high-throughput sequencing has become common practice, the cost of sequencing large amounts of genetic data has been drastically reduced, leading to much larger data sets for analysis. One important task is to identify biological conditions that lead to unusually high or low expression of a particular gene. Packages such as DESeq implement a simple method for testing differential signal when exactly two biological conditions are possible. For more than two conditions, pairwise testing is typically used. Here the DESeq method is extended so that three or more biological conditions can be assessed simultaneously. Because the computation time grows exponentially in the number of conditions, a Monte Carlo approach provides a fast way to approximate the $p$-values for the new test. The approach is studied on both simulated data and a data set of {\em C. jejuni}, the bacteria responsible for most food poisoning in the United States.