1
$\begingroup$

I am using a dataset composed by $m$ samples and $n$ features (genes). Each data point is real number.

I want to understand how to preprocess data before analysis, in particular: do data points follow a normal or a log-normal distribution?

I thought about using qqplots and searching for different tests to assess the form of the distribution, but I have a doubt:

Do I have to assess the form of:

  • each sample distribution
  • each feature (gene) distribution
  • the whole dataset ($m$ samples x $n$ features (genes))

?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This might be better suited for Cross Validated $\endgroup$ – C_Z_ Jul 7 '16 at 11:54
  • $\begingroup$ @C_Z_ you are right, but I thought it may be a task well-known for bioinformaticians, e.g. while using microarrays. However, if not, how can I transfer it to CV? Thanks $\endgroup$ – gc5 Jul 7 '16 at 12:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Have a look at biology.stackexchange.com/q/37167/3340 $\endgroup$ – WYSIWYG Jul 9 '16 at 8:59
3
$\begingroup$

From personal experience, nearly all count data whether from microarray or reads from RNAseq of some kind, requires a log transformation of the counts. Usually a small fraction is added to all values before doing so to zero protect. Log2(counts + 0.5) or some such. This is independent of the treatments. If you log transform one sample, you will do the same for all samples. To examine for normality, a simple way is to look at the histogram of counts (by all samples or by each sample) before and after transformation. Roughly bell shaped -> proceed.

Pictures below from my data. Although the data are from RNAseq, microarray data should be similar.

R code here:

hist(t$counts,breaks=100,main="Histogram of Raw Counts from RNAseq")
hist(log(t$counts + 0.5,2),breaks=100,main="Histogram of Log2
transformed Counts from RNAseq")

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ There are ways to statistically check for normality, and I find visually examining the data as I listed above is a good first step. $\endgroup$ – akaDrHouse Jul 7 '16 at 15:07
3
$\begingroup$
  • Preprocessing will and should always depend upon the biology that you try to answer or discover (e.g.: There might be an experimental rationale to believe that some genes behave differently in individual samples - and that different samples could possibly have different distributions.)
  • log-transforming your data by itself is usually no problem, and hugely facilitates the simultaneous exploration of different magnitudes (though adding a small value prior log can soon make your analysis misleading, if you intended to quantitatively study variance across samples)
  • For testing normality you might want to apply the Lilliefors test on raw data and log-transformed data
  • If you are using a readout of gene-expression you must not anticipate a unimodal distribution, e.g.: Metazoans have two different classes of genes, which overall lead to a bi-modal distribution (Hebenstreit et al. 2011) (If you can fit any unimodal distribution - such as lognormal - you should become very suspicious and check the quality of the experimental data.)
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.