Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Deconvolution

Deconvolution

Deconvolution, also known as inverse filtering, is the process of extracting the impulse response from known input and output signals. This technique is vital in scenarios where the system's characteristics are unknown, and they must be inferred from the observable signals.
Deconvolution involves several mathematical techniques to derive the impulse response. One common approach is polynomial division. In this method, the input and output sequences are treated as coefficients of...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

UPF3A and UPF3B shape the transcriptome cooperatively yet oppose cell function.

Journal of molecular biology·2026

Same author

Inaccurate interpretation of hypoxia signatures from transcriptomic analyses in neuro-oncology.

Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.)·2026

Same author

Evolutionary diversity of cell-type-specific expression and stress response in Brassicaceae roots.

Nature communications·2026

Same author

Understanding caregivers' experiences and perspectives on online support: a qualitative study.

Aging & mental health·2026

Same author

Evolutionary diversity of cell-type-specific expression and stress response in Brassicaceae roots.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026

Same author

Agency and insecurities in (re)making a sense of home amidst later life homelessness: towards a conceptual framing.

The Gerontologist·2026

Same journal

PCSK5 promotes angiogenesis and cardiac repair after myocardial infarction.

Nature communications·2026

Same journal

PfApiAT2 is a proline transporter essential for the transmission of Plasmodium falciparum by the mosquito vector.

Nature communications·2026

Same journal

Transient distortions of the South Atlantic Anomaly radiation environments driven by electric fields.

Nature communications·2026

Same journal

Structural basis of the regulation by CDK11 kinase of early spliceosome activation and evidence for its proofreading by DHX15 helicase.

Nature communications·2026

Same journal

Structural and mechanistic insights into primer synthesis initiation by DNA primase.

Nature communications·2026

Same journal

Changes in heritability and shared environmentality of educational attainment across twentieth-century Norway.

Nature communications·2026

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 30, 2025

Analyzing Multifactorial RNA-Seq Experiments with DiCoExpress

Analyzing Multifactorial RNA-Seq Experiments with DiCoExpress

Published on: July 29, 2022

Comprehensive evaluation of deconvolution methods for human brain gene expression.

Gavin J Sutton¹, Daniel Poppe^2,3, Rebecca K Simmons^2,3

¹School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Nature Communications

|March 16, 2022

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

This study evaluates transcriptome deconvolution methods for human brain data. Results highlight biological factors like brain region and cell culturing impacting accuracy for gene expression analysis.

More Related Videos

Optimized Analysis of DNA Methylation and Gene Expression from Small, Anatomically-defined Areas of the Brain

Optimized Analysis of DNA Methylation and Gene Expression from Small, Anatomically-defined Areas of the Brain

Published on: July 12, 2012

Non-Laser Capture Microscopy Approach for the Microdissection of Discrete Mouse Brain Regions for Total RNA Isolation and Downstream Next-Generation Sequencing and Gene Expression Profiling |

Non-Laser Capture Microscopy Approach for the Microdissection of Discrete Mouse Brain Regions for Total RNA Isolation and Downstream Next-Generation Sequencing and Gene Expression Profiling |

Published on: November 13, 2011

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Sep 30, 2025

Analyzing Multifactorial RNA-Seq Experiments with DiCoExpress

Analyzing Multifactorial RNA-Seq Experiments with DiCoExpress

Published on: July 29, 2022

Optimized Analysis of DNA Methylation and Gene Expression from Small, Anatomically-defined Areas of the Brain

Optimized Analysis of DNA Methylation and Gene Expression from Small, Anatomically-defined Areas of the Brain

Published on: July 12, 2012

Non-Laser Capture Microscopy Approach for the Microdissection of Discrete Mouse Brain Regions for Total RNA Isolation and Downstream Next-Generation Sequencing and Gene Expression Profiling |

Non-Laser Capture Microscopy Approach for the Microdissection of Discrete Mouse Brain Regions for Total RNA Isolation and Downstream Next-Generation Sequencing and Gene Expression Profiling |

Published on: November 13, 2011

Area of Science:

Genomics
Neuroscience
Bioinformatics

Background:

Transcriptome deconvolution estimates cellular composition from RNA data.
The human brain exhibits unique transcriptomic diversity with complex cell mixtures.
Accurate deconvolution is crucial for analyzing gene expression and correcting sample composition differences.

Purpose of the Study:

To comprehensively evaluate transcriptome deconvolution methods for human brain data.
To assess the tissue-specificity of deconvolution accuracy by comparing brain, pancreas, and heart data.
To identify key factors influencing deconvolution performance in brain samples.

Main Methods:

Evaluated eight transcriptome deconvolution approaches and nine cell-type signatures.
Tested deconvolution accuracy using in silico mixtures, RNA mixtures, and nearly 2000 human brain samples.
Compared brain data findings with human pancreas and heart data to assess tissue-specificity.

Main Results:

Identified main factors driving deconvolution accuracy specifically for human brain data.
Highlighted the significant impact of biological factors on cell-type signatures.
Demonstrated that brain region and in vitro cell culturing influence deconvolution outcomes.

Conclusions:

Deconvolution accuracy for human brain data is influenced by specific biological factors.
Cell-type signature quality, affected by sample source (e.g., brain region, culturing), is critical.
This evaluation provides insights for improving gene expression analysis in complex tissues like the brain.