Index Slide 2-5: Statistical testing results 6-14: Clustering results 15-17: GRNsight visualization of YEASTRACT results 18-20: GRNmap output visualization.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

From the homework: Distribution of DNA fragments generated by Micrococcal nuclease digestion mean(nucs) = bp median(nucs) = 110 bp sd(nucs+ = 17.3.

Advertisements

Statistical Analysis of Microarray Data

ANOVA WTdZAP1 p < /6189 (31.42%)2264/6189 (36.58%) p < /6189 (24.67%)1445/6189 (23.35%) p < /6189 (13.90%)792/6189 (12.80%) p

Determining the Identity and Dynamics of the Gene Regulatory Network Controlling the Response to Cold Shock in Saccharomyces cerevisiae June 24, 2015.

Deletion of ZAP1 as a transcriptional factor has minor effects on S. cerevisiae regulatory network in cold shock KARA DISMUKE AND KRISTEN HORSTMANN MAY.

Analyzing the grass shrimp data from Wednesday’s lab Step one: make 3 graphs, each with “Number of cysts” on the x-axis Step two: do pairwise t-tests or.

GRNmap Testing Analysis Grace Johnson and Natalie Williams June 10, 2015.

GRNmap Testing Grace Johnson and Natalie Williams June 3, 2015.

Open Source Projects for Undergraduate Research Experiences

Lab 5 instruction.  a collection of statistical methods to compare several groups according to their means on a quantitative response variable  Two-Way.

A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T E T Faculty of Agricultural Sciences Introduction to analysis of microarray data David Edwards.

Changes in Gene Regulation in Δ Zap1 Strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae due to Cold Shock Jim McDonald and Paul Magnano.

GRNmap and GRNsight June 24, Systems Biology Workflow DNA microarray data: wet lab-generated or published Generate gene regulatory network Modeling.

Data Analysis and GRNmap Testing Grace Johnson and Natalie Williams June 24, 2015.

T T13-03 Line Plot & Bar Graph (by XY Category) Purpose Allows the analyst to visually analyze the difference in data samples by 6 X-categories.

Creating a Gene Regulatory Network Comparing a Wild Type Strain with a Mutant ΔGLN3 Deletion in S. cerevisiae Showed that ΔGLN3 Exhibits No Meaningful.

Economics Data and Math 1.  Playing with variables and numbers  Index  Absolute vs relative  Index = number  No units  No units = unit A / unit.

Statistical Analysis of Microarray Data By H. Bjørn Nielsen.

GRNmap Testing Grace Johnson and Natalie Williams June 17, 2015.

Student: Trixie Anne M. Roque, Tessa A. Morris Faculty Mentors: Dr. Kam D. Dahlquist, Dr. Ben G. Fitzpatrick, & Dr. John David N. Dionisio SURP 2015 Final.

Within Strain ANOVA WTdHAP4 p < (38.4%)2387 (38.6%) p < (24.7%)1489 (24.1 %) p < (13.8%)679 (11.0%) p < (7.25%)240.

Distinguishing active from non active genes: Main principle: DNA hybridization -DNA hybridizes due to base pairing using H-bonds -A/T and C/G and A/U possible.

Comparison of the wild type of S. cerevisiae and S. paradoxus Karina Alvarez and Natalie Williams.

Outline S. cerevisiae, a eukaryote known for cold-shock adaption, used in cold-shock experiments Deletion strand HMO1 and the comparison of microarray.

Comparison of the wild type of S. cerevisiae and S. paradoxus Karina Alvarez and Natalie Williams.

Micro array Data Analysis. Differential Gene Expression Analysis The Experiment Micro-array experiment measures gene expression in Rats (>5000 genes).

Departments of Biology and Mathematics

Student: Trixie Anne M. Roque, Tessa A. Morris

Eddie Azinge, John Lopez, and Corinne Wong

Evaluating Hap4’s Role in the Gene Regulatory Network that Controls the Response to Cold Shock in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using GRNmap K. Grace Johnson1,

Week 14 Assignment Kara Dismuke.

Final Presentation [work in progress… work completed for Week 11 Journal Assignment] Kara Dismuke.

Evaluating Hap4’s Role in the Gene Regulatory Network that Controls the Response to Cold Shock in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using GRNmap K. Grace Johnson1,

Deletion of ZAP1 as a transcriptional factor has minor effects on S

Week 14 Assignment Kara Dismuke.

Lauren Kelly April 19th, 2017 BIOL398-05

Biomathematical Modeling: The Deletion of HMO1 and its Effect on Cold Shock Reaction in S. cerevisiae Lauren Magee & Lucia Ramirez Department of Mathematics.

ANOVA Within Strain P-values

dCIN5 and Wildtype Transcription Factor Mapping in Cold Shock

Change in Expression after modifying fix_b?

Change in Expression after modifying fix_b?

Change in Expression after modifying fix_b?

Comparison of the P-value significance between Wild Type and ΔGLN3

Within Strain ANOVA for All Strains

Significance Table from Anova Test

GRNmap Testing and Results

Change in Expression after modifying fix_b?

Final Presentation [work in progress… work completed for Week 11 Journal Assignment] Kara Dismuke.

Week 11 Assignment Figures

dCIN5 and Wildtype Transcription Factor Mapping in Cold Shock

Comparison of the P-value significance between Wild Type and ΔGLN3

Loyola Marymount Unviersity

ANOVA Within Strain P-values

Percentages of specific p-value data

Evaluating Hap4’s Role in the Gene Regulatory Network that Controls the Response to Cold Shock in Saccharomyces cerevisiae using GRNmap K. Grace Johnson1,

Within-strain ANOVA for dCIN5

Week 11 Assignment Figures

(Within-Strain ANOVA)

Comparison of the P-value significance between Wild Type and dGLN3

ANOVA WT STRAIN p < 0.05 number (%) p < 0.01 p < p <

Jeffrey Crosson and William Gendron

Percentages of specific p-value data

Effect Size Activity Consider the study:

Benjamini & Hochberg-corrected p < 0.05 Bonferroni-corrected

CPPED1 (A) and PPARγ2 (B) mRNA expressions in cultured SGBS cells during adipocyte differentiation. CPPED1 (A) and PPARγ2 (B) mRNA expressions in cultured.

Loyola Marymount University

Jeffrey Crosson and William Gendron

Jeffrey Crosson and William Gendron

Presentation transcript:

Index Slide 2-5: Statistical testing results 6-14: Clustering results 15-17: GRNsight visualization of YEASTRACT results 18-20: GRNmap output visualization

ANOVA wtdCIN5dGLN3dHAP4dSWI4 p < (38.41%) 1195 (19.31%) 1856 (29.98%) 2387 (38.57%) 2583 (41.74%) p < (24.74%) 1157 (18.69%) 1007 (16.27%) 1489 (24.06%) 1679 (27.13%) p < (13.73%)566 (9.15%)398 (6.43%)679 (10.97%)869 (14.04%) p < (7.25%)280 (4.52%)121 (1.96%)240 (3.88%)446 (7.21%) B & H p < (27.03%) 109 (1.76%)889 (14.36%) 1615 (26.09%) 1855 (29.97%) Bonferroni p < (3.65%)109 (1.76%)20 (0.32%)61 (0.99%)179 (2.89%) ANOVA results

dGLN3 Cold ShockRecovery t testt 15 t 30 t 60 t 90 t 120 Average Log Fold Change > 0.25 and p < (9.03%)897 (14.49%)319 (5.15%)265 (4.28%)190 (3.07%) Average Log Fold Change < and p < (7.4%)711 (11.49%)304 (4.91%) 289 (4.67%)207 (3.34%) Total p < (16.59%) 1622 (26.21%) 628 (10.15%) 558 (9.11%)403 (6.51%) Total B & H p < (0%)5 (0.08%)0 (0%) Total Bonferroni p < (0%)1 (0.016%)0 (0%) Modified t-test results dGLN3

p < 0.05t 15 t 30 t 60 t 90 t 120 wt 1075 (17.37%) 1587 (25.64%) 1814 (29.31%) 749 (12.1%)509 (8.22%) dCIN (22.51%) 756 (12.22%) 1250 (20.20%) 634 (10.24%)351 (5.67%) dGLN (16.59%) 1622 (26.21%) 628 (10.15%)558 (9.02%)403 (6.51%) dHAP (19.34%) 1772 (28.63%) 2006 (32.41%) 234 (3.78%)515 (8.32%) dSWI (24.19%) 1757 (28.39%) 1075 (17.37%) 705 (11.39%) Modified t-test results

p < 0.05B-H p < 0.05 wt vs dCIN5563 (9.10%)4 (0.065%) wt vs dGLN3720 (11.63%)36 (0.58%) wt vs dHAP4640 (10.34%)23 (0.37%) wt vs dHMO1556 (8.98%)5 (0.081%) wt vs dZAP1553(8.94%)31 (0.5%) wt vs Spar1498 (24.2%)703 (11.36%) Between-strain ANOVA

Clustering results

Profile 6

Profile 9

Profile 14

Profile 19

Profile 24

Profile 39

Profile 41

Profile 44

Profile 24: DNA Binding PLUS Expression Evidence

Profile 24: ONLY DNA Binding Evidence

Profile 14: DNA Binding PLUS Expression Evidence

Profile 24: GRNmap Fixed b Output

Profile 24: GRNmap Estimate b Output

Bar Graph comparing the Estimate b and Fixed b values