Hello,
We'll have an RNAseq analysis group TC on Thursday the 31st at 4pm CET.
On the agenda:
- upcoming conferences
- our future projects using Geuvadis data
- main paper updates (no major news yet)
- companion paper updates
- web page / wiki
If you can't attend the call but you're thinking of submitting a
Geuvadis-related abstract to a conference, or if you're working on a
project that uses Geuvadis data, please send me an email (before the
call = now) so that we'll know.
best,
Tuuli
The numbers are:
SPAIN
900800678
GERMANY
08001013982
NETHERLANDS
08002658044
FRANCE
0800947739
UNITED KINGDOM
08005285280
UNITED STATES
8005369053
SWEDEN
0201400578
>From Other countries
+34 917911859
Access code:
3160100
--
Tuuli Lappalainen, PhD
Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine , and
Department of Genetic Medicine and Development, University of Geneva
Email: tuuli.e.lappalainen(a)gmail.com / tlappala(a)stanford.edu
Tel: +1 415 351 9713
Bustamante lab
Department of Genetics
300 Pasteur Dr. Lane L301
Stanford, CA 94305-5120
USA
Hello,
I've organized the quantification and QTL files that I suggest that we
release when the paper is eventually published (no news from Nature
yet). The attached exel sheet contains brief descriptions and FTP
locations of the data files as well as sample information files (note
that it has multiple sheets). I'll prepare more detailed documentation
before the files go public.
In summary, I suggest that we release the following files. Any
objections / additions?
- quantifications of exons, transcripts, genes, repeats, miRNAs, RNA
edited sites. Of all these: raw counts and library depth corrected
quantifications of all QC-passed samples, as well as PEER-normalized
files of nonredundant samples.
- QTLs of all the above: all significant associations and best
association per gene for both CEU and YRI.
Natalja, you can start organizing the files, but do NOT release them to
the public yet.
best,
Tuuli
--
Tuuli Lappalainen, PhD
Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine , and
Department of Genetic Medicine and Development, University of Geneva
Email: tuuli.e.lappalainen(a)gmail.com / tlappala(a)stanford.edu
Tel: +1 415 351 9713
Bustamante lab
Department of Genetics
300 Pasteur Dr. Lane L301
Stanford, CA 94305-5120
USA
Dear all,
The Geuvadis RNAseq paper was rejected this morning. We've decided with
Manolis that we should make an appeal, and we have already been in touch
with Magdalena about this. We'll need to send her a response letter in a
couple of days (see the attachment with reviewer's comments and a rough
response draft). It ain't over til it's over.
Since we were going to have a call soon anyway, let's have a *TC on
Thursday the 24th at 4pm CET*. Before that, I'd be happy to hear your
*comments to the response letter (deadline: immediately)*. There's a
couple of bigger items to discuss, and specific questions to a few of
you - see below. There won't be a lot of new analysis to do if we're
given the chance to revise.
Questions:
- Do we drop non-essential analyses as #2 suggests? This would mean RNA
editing, maybe fusions and subtle splicing. I'm not keen to, but if
people think it would improve the overall quality of the paper...
- Should we restructure the supplement by topic instead of
methods/figures/tables? Need to ask Magdalena too.
- Andrew & Natalja: Can we add a data slicing and download function to
the browser (or a separate site linked from the browser)?
- Jean & Mar: How is the qualitative/quantitative analysis affected by
low-abundance transcripts? Will the results change if the threshold is
different?
- Jean, Mar, Pedro, Micha (and myself): #2 raises an important question
(really!): most of transcript variation is explained by transcript ratio
differences, but we find very few QTLs for this. Why do you think this
is? Is all that variation really just random/environmental/epigenetic?
- Jean: #3 suspects that the 3% of transcriptome variation explained by
population could be just random - how do we respond to this?
- Manny: What could we do to add novelty value to NMD analysis?
- Gabrielle: Is it possible to make a read-only password for the wiki?
We could give one to the reviewers just so that they can see it.
best regards,
Tuuli
--
Tuuli Lappalainen, PhD
Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine , and
Department of Genetic Medicine and Development, University of Geneva
Email: tuuli.e.lappalainen(a)gmail.com / tlappala(a)stanford.edu
Tel: +1 415 351 9713
Bustamante lab
Department of Genetics
300 Pasteur Dr. Lane L301
Stanford, CA 94305-5120
USA
Hello all,
*Please fill in a Doodle by Friday *for a new Geuvadis RNAseq call time:
http://www.doodle.com/hrgvdn5drnd845sh .
No news from the paper... But it would be good to have a call to catch
up on a couple of things:
- upcoming conferences and presentations (ESHG, The Next NGS Challenge
Conference, Biology of Genomes)
- future companion/spin-off projects using Geuvadis data
- other updates
I'm now in California, so our old 2pm CET slot would be just too early
for me. The Doodle is for a new time that we can use when needed, not in
a weekly basis. The poll has time zone support on the upper left side.
best,
Tuuli
--
Tuuli Lappalainen, PhD
Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine , and
Department of Genetic Medicine and Development, University of Geneva
Email: tuuli.e.lappalainen(a)gmail.com / tlappala(a)stanford.edu
Tel: +1 415 351 9713
Bustamante lab
Department of Genetics
300 Pasteur Dr. Lane L301
Stanford, CA 94305-5120
USA
Hello,
Happy new year to all of you, I hope you've enjoyed your holidays.
The good news that I have to tell is that the RNAseq paper is under
review; Magdalena told me this just before Christmas. So we can expect
news from there in a couple of weeks.
The bad news is that as I was going through some data files, I
discovered a bug that is non-fatal but still needs to be fixed - and
it's very early on in the process. In the processing of quantifications
when I correct for the total number of mapped reads (the 45N in the file
names), I've made an indexing error and corrected for the total number
of unmapped reads instead. These two are very highly correlated, (see
attachment; only the correlation and not the absolute numbers matter),
so I'm 98% sure that none of the biological results will change. I
already reran the repeat eQTL analysis for Europeans: Previously we had
5652 repeats with an eQTL, and after correction of the bug there's 5588,
of which 5239 are the same as before - the difference in total numbers
is 1%, and we both lose and gain some, with a total 7% change. I think
this is not too bad, and I expect similar results from other reruns that
I'm working on now. Permutation results were identical so I won't need
to rerun them.
The bug affects non-RPKM-based quantifications (exons, repeats, and LoF
analyses of junctions, introns), eQTL analyses of exons and repeats,
miRNA-mRNA correlations, QC analyses based on exon quantifications.
Transcript and gene level analyses are based on RPKMs and are
unaffected, as are miRNA quantifications.
Needless to say, I'm extremely sorry and very angry at myself that I
screwed up in such an early step. Most but not all of the analyses that
need to be reran are mine, and deep apologies for the extra work that
this will cause. If there is any analysis where you have used files with
45N, it needs to be updated. I will be rerunning things - starting from
the files that affect others - during the next couple of days and will
be in touch with the relevant people individually.
FYI, I'm moving to San Francisco on the 8th, so being on the Pacific
time zone will affect my email reaction speed and schedules of any
conference calls.
best,
Tuuli
--
Tuuli Lappalainen, PhD
Department of Genetic Medicine and Development
University of Geneva Medical School
CMU / Rue Michel-Servet 1
1211 Geneva 4
Switzerland
Tel. +41-(0)22-3795550
tuuli.lappalainen(a)unige.ch