Cargando…
Methods detecting rhythmic gene expression are biologically relevant only for strong signal
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...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7100990/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32182235 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007666 |
_version_ | 1783511529903095808 |
---|---|
author | Laloum, David Robinson-Rechavi, Marc |
author_facet | Laloum, David Robinson-Rechavi, Marc |
author_sort | Laloum, David |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7100990 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71009902020-04-03 Methods detecting rhythmic gene expression are biologically relevant only for strong signal Laloum, David Robinson-Rechavi, Marc PLoS Comput Biol Research Article 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. Public Library of Science 2020-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7100990/ /pubmed/32182235 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007666 Text en © 2020 Laloum, Robinson-Rechavi http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Laloum, David Robinson-Rechavi, Marc Methods detecting rhythmic gene expression are biologically relevant only for strong signal |
title | Methods detecting rhythmic gene expression are biologically relevant only for strong signal |
title_full | Methods detecting rhythmic gene expression are biologically relevant only for strong signal |
title_fullStr | Methods detecting rhythmic gene expression are biologically relevant only for strong signal |
title_full_unstemmed | Methods detecting rhythmic gene expression are biologically relevant only for strong signal |
title_short | Methods detecting rhythmic gene expression are biologically relevant only for strong signal |
title_sort | methods detecting rhythmic gene expression are biologically relevant only for strong signal |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7100990/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32182235 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007666 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT laloumdavid methodsdetectingrhythmicgeneexpressionarebiologicallyrelevantonlyforstrongsignal AT robinsonrechavimarc methodsdetectingrhythmicgeneexpressionarebiologicallyrelevantonlyforstrongsignal |