-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
How to understand otherExon #22
Comments
Hi LeeLee, Thank you for trying ChIPpeakAnno to annotate your data. And sorry for the unclear documentation. |
Hi Jianhong, Thanks for your reply, I have understood the problem, but I still have some doubts.
There are a total of 10219 peaks in my data, all of them are on exons. I thought that the number of peaks located in geneBody would be equal to CDS+otherExon+utr3+utr5, but I found that the result is not the case, the number of CDS+otherExon+utr3+utr5 is equal to geneBody+geneDownstream+promoter, which means that some peak of the exon is considered to be located in the geneDownstream and the promoter at the same time. How should I understand this phenomenon? Thanks, |
what is your annotation order?Best!Your sincerely,Jianhong OuOn Dec 6, 2022, at 10:29 PM, LeeLee ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi Jianhong,
Thanks for your reply, I have understood the problem, but I still have some doubts.
For example in my data:
table(gr1[["peaks"]]$ExonIntron)
exon
10219
table(gr1[["peaks"]]$Exons)
CDS otherExon utr3 utr5
4058 583 4921 657
table(gr1[["peaks"]]$geneLevel)
geneBody geneDownstream promoter
8877 430 912
There are a total of 10219 peaks in my data, all of them are on exons. I thought that the number of peaks located in geneBody would be equal to CDS+otherExon+utr3+utr5, but I found that the result is not the case, the number of CDS+otherExon+utr3+utr5 is equal to geneBody+geneDownstream+promoter, which means that some peak of the exon is considered to be located in the geneDownstream and the promoter at the same time. How should I understand this phenomenon?
Thanks,
LeeLee
—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
I used the GRCh38 annotation from GENCODE, I guess because some gene exon regions were judged to be geneDownstream or promoter for some other genes. but this didn't have much impact on my subsequent analysis, so it wasn't too much of an issue. |
There are 2 parameter will affect this annotation, one is keepExonsInGenesOnly, please try to set it as FALSE to see what will happen. 2 is to check the labels order, that will affect the annotation precedence. Let me know the results. Thank you. |
I tried setting keepExonsInGenesOnly to T or F, but it didn't affect the results, and the order of the labels was the same. If you need, I can provide my bed file, which is a MERIP-seq data analyzed using exomepeak2. |
Hi, |
Hi Jianhong,
I have some questions about the concept of otherExon of the genomicElementDistribution function, how can I understand this concept, and what kind of peaks will be considered to come from belonging to otherExon.
Thanks,
LeeLee
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: