Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Paper Review on Cross- species Microarray Comparison Hong Lu 2008-10-14.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Paper Review on Cross- species Microarray Comparison Hong Lu 2008-10-14."— Presentation transcript:

1 Paper Review on Cross- species Microarray Comparison Hong Lu 2008-10-14

2 Title: Conservation of Regional Gene Expression in Mouse and Human Brain Authors: Strand AD, Olson JM., et.al Year: 2007 Journal: PLoS genetics

3 Purpose In-species comparison: To find the differences to distinguish resistant and sensitive tissues and cell types. Cross-species comparison: To provide a framework to explore the ability of mouse to model diseases of the human brain.

4 HumanGroup IGroup IITotal Tissue 3: caudate, cerebellum, motor cortex 2: caudate cerebellum Persons man8715 woman426 Total12921 Total Slides 12 x 3 = 369 x 2 = 1854 Age Range36 ~ 7722 ~ 7222 ~ 77 Mean584954 AffymetrixHG-U133A Probesets #22,283 Materials

5 SpeciesHumanMouse(C57BL) Tissue 3 caudate, cerebellum, motor cortex Sample Male81 Female45 Total126 Total Slides 12 x 3 = 366 x 3 = 18 Age Range36 ~ 77 (years)35 (days) Mean58 (years)35 (days) AffymetrixHG-U133AMOE_430A_2 Probesets #22,28322,690

6 Microarray analysis 1) Normalize the CEL files with Robust Multiple- array Average (RMA). 2) Fit a linear model for each of three pairs with LIMMA (bioconductor package) gene expression ≈ donor + tissue type Caudate/Cerebellum BA4 Cortex/Cerebellum BA4 Cortex/Caudate 3) Get log ratio, paired t-statistics and p-values

7 Sample result (human) ScoreCaudate/Cerebellum… CaudateCerebellumMotor cortexProbeset IDLog Ratio tP.value… 106.05-89.15-16.9215241_at6.0865.11.65E-21… 103.2-62.01-41.19220313_at5.9571.93.13E-22… 93.7-51.66-42.04207307_at5.0471.93.16E-22… Caudate score = t-score(Caudate/Cerebellum) + t-score(Caudate/BA4 Cortex)

8 Different Regions of the Brain Show Many Statistically Significant Differentially Expressed Genes

9 To select sets of genes whose expression was highly enriched in one of the three regions 1) p < 0.001 and log ratio ≥ 1 in both relevant pair-wise comparisons. 2) The log ratios of the two relevant comparisons were summed, such as log2(BA4/caudate) + log2(BA4/cerebellum) would be candidate BA4 genes Caudate CerebellumBA4 Cortex

10 3) Order sum of log ratios 4) if summed regional score >2 in more than one region, probesets were culled from the list. Table 3:Selected Regionally Enriched Genes in Human and Mouse Brain Tissues

11 Gene Expression Variation between Tissues and Individuals gene expression ≈ donor + tissue type Within-tissue variance VS Between-tissue variance The variance for a probeset, across n samples, was calculated by where x i is the RMA signal for probeset i on array n.

12 The between-tissue variability was greater for 89% of the human probesets and 85% of the mouse probesets. Conclusion: Compared to expression dictated by regional identity, age and gender appear to have effects of small magnitude or of large magnitude on a small fraction of genes, even in humans.

13 Cross-Species Comparison of Regional Gene Expression What’s the relationship between mouse probesets and human probesets? ENSEMBL Mouse probesets  Mouse ENSEMBL identities (Example: 1415688_at) Human probesets  Human ENSEMBL identities (209141_at)

14 dN/dS dN (number of nonsynonymous substitutions / number of nonsynonymous sites) dS (number of synonymous substitutions / number of synonymous sites) dN/dS was generated using the codeml (PAML package, pair-wise Maximum Likelihood Method) with F3 × 4 codon evolution model

15 Pick up 2,998 one-to-one orthologus pairs. Compute normalized Euclidian distance between all possible nonself pairs of tissues. where there are g probesets and x and y are any two mouse or human samples. Euclidian distances between regions were calculated using the mean RMA probeset signals for each tissue.

16 Conclusion: Orthologous Brain Regions between Species Are More Similar to Each Other than to Different Regions within a Species

17 Analysis of GO categories Human: 70.6% of the probesets had an assigned GO category. Mouse: 66.2% of the probesets had an assigned GO category. For each GO category, The total number of probes in that category (a) VS The number of probes appearing on a list of differentially expressed probes (p < 0.05) (b) Fisher's exact testPearson chi-square If a or b < 10Otherwise To detect which category is over-represented.

18 Conclusion: Mouse and Human Brain Regions Share a Higher Number of Overrepresented Functional Groups than Would Be Expected by Chance

19 Relationships between Tissue-Specific Expression, Conservation of Sequence, and Conservation of Expression (A)X-axis: dN/dS ratios, least conserved (left) to most conserved (right). Y-axis: Correlation coefficient between human and mouse log ratios. (B)X-axis: The percent nucleotide identity, low (left) to high (right). Y-axis: Correlation coefficient between human and mouse log ratios.

20 Conclusion: Genes with High Variance across Tissues Have Greater Conservation of Nucleotide Sequence

21 Conclusion 1)In-species comparison: The different brain regions have distinctly different expression profiles. 2)Cross-species comparison: Region-specific genes are conserved at both the sequence and gene expression levels. (positive correlated)

22 Advantage and Shortage?

23 Thanks


Download ppt "Paper Review on Cross- species Microarray Comparison Hong Lu 2008-10-14."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google