Which is better for cDNA-microarray-based classification: ratios or direct intensities.

Sanju Attoor; Edward R Dougherty; Yidong Chen; Michael L Bittner; Jeffrey M Trent

doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bth272

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 15454406

Which is better for cDNA-microarray-based classification: ratios or direct intensities.

Sanju Attoor·Edward R Dougherty·Yidong Chen·Michael L Bittner·Jeffrey M Trent

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

MOTIVATION: There are two general methods for making gene-expression microarrays: one is to hybridize a single test set of labeled targets to the probe, and measure the background-subtracted intensity at each probe site; the other is to hybridize both a test and a reference set of differentially labeled targets to a single detector array, and measure the ratio of the background-subtracted intensities at each probe site. Which method is better depends on the variability in the cell system and the random factors resulting from the microarray technology. It also depends on the purpose for which the microarray is being used. Classification is a fundamental application and it is the one considered here. RESULTS: This paper describes a model-based simulation paradigm that compares the classification accuracy provided by these methods over a variety of noise types and presents the results of a study modeled on noise typical of cDNA microarray data. The model consists of four parts: (1) the measurement equation for genes in the reference state; (2) the measurement equation for genes in the test state; (3) the ratio and normalization procedure for a dual-channel system; and (4) the intensity and normalization procedure for a single-channel system. In the reference state, the mean intensities are modeled as a shifted exponential distribution, and the intensity for a particular gene is modeled via a normal distribution, Normal(I, alphaI), about its mean intensity I, with alpha being the coefficient of variation of the cell system. In the test state, some genes have their intensities up-regulated by a random factor. The model includes a number of random factors affecting intensity measurement: deposition gain d, labeling gain, and post-image-processing residual noise. The key conclusion resulting from the study is that the coefficient of variation governing the randomness of the intensities and the deposition gain are the most important factors for determining whether a single-channel or dual-channel system provides superior classification, and the decision region in the alpha-d plane is approximately linear.

Explore related subjects

Algorithms Computer Simulation DNA Equipment Failure Analysis Gene Expression Profiling Genetic Variation Models, Genetic Models, Statistical Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis Reproducibility of Results Sensitivity and Specificity Comparative Study Evaluation Study Journal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Sanju Attoor, Edward R Dougherty, Yidong Chen, Michael L Bittner, Jeffrey M Trent. 2004-09-28. Which is better for cDNA-microarray-based classification: ratios or direct intensities.. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics%2Fbth272

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

A note on a generalized single step theory for any number of hierarchical genomic matrices.

BACKGROUND: The Single Step algorithm allows combining information from genotyped and un-genotyped individuals, provided they are connected by a pedigree. However, current single step theory is limited to a single list of markers. RESULTS: We present a generalized single step (GSS) method that can accommodate any number of hierarchical molecular datasets (e.g. sequence, high and low density arrays) and pedigree, avoiding imputation. We prove that a similar efficient inversion algorithm exists. The method is recursive, starting with the highest marker density scenario. We illustrate the method with simulation and show that GSS can increase predictive accuracy compared to standard single step. R code is provided so that custom scenarios can be easily compared, either with simulated or real data. CONCLUSION: The method developed generalizes extant single step theory to any number of hierarchical molecular relationship matrices, broadening the scenarios where single step can be applied. A topic of particular interest can be ecology field data or human populations where pedigree is not available, but where samples sequenced and genotyped at different densities can exist. GSS can also be a useful tool to optimize allocation of genotyping and / or sequencing resources.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2026

cgDist: Nucleotide-level distance calculation from cgMLST allelic profiles.

Bacterial genomic surveillance requires balancing computational efficiency with genetic resolution for effective cluster investigation. cgMLST distance calculations treat all allelic differences as equivalent units, obscuring nucleotide-level variation. Furthermore, single nucleotide polymorphism-based pipelines provide finer resolution at substantially higher computational cost, which limits their routine deployment in surveillance laboratories. We present cgDist, an algorithm that calculates nucleotide-level distances directly from cgMLST allelic profiles, providing finer resolution than allele-count distances by leveraging within-allele nucleotide variation. The cache architecture stores alignment statistics, enabling distance calculation modes without computation and supporting both dataset-specific and schema-complete cache generation. This design enables incremental surveillance analysis, with performance benefits as laboratories accumulate alignment data. cgDist functions as a precision 'zoom lens' for the investigation of clusters identified through initial cgMLST screening. Rather than restructuring population relationships, this targeted approach concentrates enhanced resolution where it is most informative. The algorithm ensures that cgDist distances are greater than or equal to corresponding cgMLST distances, preserving epidemiological interpretability while adding genetic discrimination. By increasing resolution within identified clusters, cgDist may also support outbreak investigation, a potential application that remains to be evaluated on outbreak-derived data.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2026

Theseus: fast and optimal affine-gap sequence-to-graph alignment.

MOTIVATION: Sequence-to-graph alignment is a central problem in bioinformatics, with applications in multiple sequence alignment (MSA) and pangenome analysis, among others. However, current algorithms for optimal affine-gap alignment impose high memory and computational requirements, limiting their scalability to aligning long sequences to complex graphs. Practical solutions partially address this problem using heuristic strategies that ultimately trade off optimality for speed. RESULTS: This work presents Theseus, a novel, fast, and optimal affine-gap sequence-to-graph alignment algorithm. Theseus leverages similarities between genomic sequences to accelerate the alignment computation and reduces the overall memory requirements without compromising optimality. To that end, Theseus processes only a subset of the dynamic programming cells, using a sparse-data strategy that enables efficient sequence-to-graph alignment. Moreover, our algorithm supports optimal affine-gap alignment on arbitrary directed graphs, including those with cycles. We evaluate Theseus on two key problems: MSA and pangenome read mapping. For MSA, we compare it against SPOA, abPOA, and POASTA. Theseus is 1.6× to 17.6× faster than POASTA, and 7.3× faster, on average, than SPOA, both optimal aligners. Compared with abPOA, Theseus ensures optimality and scales to the largest problems. For pangenome read mapping, we benchmark Theseus against the alignment stage of the mapping tool vg map, along with the alignment kernels of SPOA, abPOA, and POASTA. Theseus outperforms the other methods, showing a 1.9× to 16.9× speedup on short reads. Moreover, Theseus is 1.5× to 36.3× faster than vg when aligning against synthetic cyclic graphs. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Theseus code and documentation are publicly available at https://github.com/albertjimenezbl/theseus-lib.

Algorithms↗