Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

DNA Microarrays02:34

DNA Microarrays

Microarrays are high-throughput and relatively inexpensive assays that can be automated to analyze large quantities of data at a time. They are used in genome-wide studies to compare gene or protein expression under two varied conditions, such as healthy and diseased states. Microarrays consist of glass or silica slides on which probe molecules are covalently attached through surface functionalization. Most commonly, the slides are prepared through the chemisorption of silanes to silica...
Multiple Comparison Tests01:13

Multiple Comparison Tests

Multiple comparison test, abbreviated as MCT, is a post hoc analysis generally performed after comparing multiple samples with one or more tests. An MCT will help identify a significantly different sample among multiple samples or a factor among multiple factors.
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups01:20

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups

Survival analysis is a cornerstone of medical research, used to evaluate the time until an event of interest occurs, such as death, disease recurrence, or recovery. Unlike standard statistical methods, survival analysis is particularly adept at handling censored data—instances where the event has not occurred for some participants by the end of the study or remains unobserved. To address these unique challenges, specialized techniques like the Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and Cox...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Garment-related patient-reported outcomes: a longitudinal pre-post comparison of autologous versus implant-based breast reconstruction.

European journal of oncology nursing : the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society·2026
Same author

A Threat to Evidence-Based Vaccine Policy and Public Health Security at the FDA.

The New England journal of medicine·2025
Same author

Simulated microgravity accurately models long-duration spaceflight effects on bone and skeletal muscle in skeletally immature mice.

Bone reports·2025
Same author

What Rankings, Ratings, and Utilities Do Breast Cancer Patients Place on Tissue- and Implant-based Breast Reconstruction?

Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open·2025
Same author

Assessment of Appearance-related Questions About Breast Reconstruction Generated by Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer.

Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open·2025
Same author

Breast cancer survivors' perceptual map of breast reconstruction appearance outcomes.

Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 18, 2026

Three Differential Expression Analysis Methods for RNA Sequencing: limma, EdgeR, DESeq2
10:10

Three Differential Expression Analysis Methods for RNA Sequencing: limma, EdgeR, DESeq2

Published on: September 18, 2021

Empirical comparison of tests for differential expression on time-series microarray experiments.

Ernest A Fischer1, Michael A Friedman, Mia K Markey

  • 1Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, Campus Code C0800, 1 University Station, Austin, TX 78712, USA.

Genomics
|December 26, 2006
PubMed
Summary

This study compared gene expression analysis methods on simulated and real time-series data. ANOVA variants and a GSVD-based method showed promise for identifying differential gene expression, especially with background correction.

More Related Videos

Analyzing Multifactorial RNA-Seq Experiments with DiCoExpress
05:22

Analyzing Multifactorial RNA-Seq Experiments with DiCoExpress

Published on: July 29, 2022

Alignment of Synchronized Time-Series Data Using the Characterizing Loss of Cell Cycle Synchrony Model for Cross-Experiment Comparisons
07:59

Alignment of Synchronized Time-Series Data Using the Characterizing Loss of Cell Cycle Synchrony Model for Cross-Experiment Comparisons

Published on: June 9, 2023

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 18, 2026

Three Differential Expression Analysis Methods for RNA Sequencing: limma, EdgeR, DESeq2
10:10

Three Differential Expression Analysis Methods for RNA Sequencing: limma, EdgeR, DESeq2

Published on: September 18, 2021

Analyzing Multifactorial RNA-Seq Experiments with DiCoExpress
05:22

Analyzing Multifactorial RNA-Seq Experiments with DiCoExpress

Published on: July 29, 2022

Alignment of Synchronized Time-Series Data Using the Characterizing Loss of Cell Cycle Synchrony Model for Cross-Experiment Comparisons
07:59

Alignment of Synchronized Time-Series Data Using the Characterizing Loss of Cell Cycle Synchrony Model for Cross-Experiment Comparisons

Published on: June 9, 2023

Area of Science:

  • Bioinformatics
  • Computational Biology
  • Gene Expression Analysis

Background:

  • Accurate identification of differentially expressed genes is crucial for understanding biological processes.
  • Time-series microarray data presents unique challenges for differential expression analysis due to temporal dependencies.
  • Existing methods require careful evaluation for their performance on complex biological datasets.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the performance of various statistical methods for identifying differentially expressed genes in time-series microarray data.
  • To evaluate these methods on both simulated gene networks and real immune response data.
  • To provide recommendations for selecting appropriate methods based on data characteristics and experimental goals.

Main Methods:

  • Simulated time-series microarray data from artificial gene networks.
  • Real immune response data from Boldrick et al. (2002).
  • Analysis of methods including ANOVA variants, empirical Bayes Wilcoxon rank sum test, and a proposed GSVD-based approach.
  • Evaluation of preprocessing techniques like background correction and lowess normalization.

Main Results:

  • ANOVA variants by Cui and Churchill were recommended for simulated data.
  • Efron and Tibshirani's empirical Bayes Wilcoxon rank sum test performed well without effective background correction.
  • The proposed GSVD-based method demonstrated sensitivity in detecting subtle expression changes.
  • ANOVA excelled at detecting temporal changes, while GSVD and empirical Bayes identified spikes and overall shifts, respectively, in real data.
  • Lowess normalization improved results with background correction but decreased performance without it on simulated data.

Conclusions:

  • The choice of differential gene expression analysis method depends on data characteristics, including the presence of background noise and temporal patterns.
  • ANOVA variants and GSVD-based methods, particularly when combined with appropriate preprocessing, offer robust approaches for time-series gene expression analysis.
  • Recommendations are provided to guide researchers in selecting optimal methods for their specific time-series gene expression studies.