Skip to content
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

TF Enrichment Scores #33

Closed
jamrute opened this issue Dec 24, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

TF Enrichment Scores #33

jamrute opened this issue Dec 24, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@jamrute
Copy link

jamrute commented Dec 24, 2020

Thank you for developing this great tool!

For the TF enrichment scores from (https://bioconductor.org/packages/release/data/experiment/vignettes/dorothea/inst/doc/single_cell_vignette.html#introduction) do positive values mean positive enrichment and negative values mean negative enrichment of the respective TFs?

I am trying to take the ratio of TF enrichment scores for two different cell types and want to understand how best to do this/interpret the results.

@christianholland
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @jamrute,

indeed a positive enrichment score means that the target genes of your TF are enriched at the top ranks of your expression profile and vice versa.

Just a small idea what you can try if you would want to find differences in TF activity between cell types. Assuming you have a Seurat object you can directly run the run_viper() function on your object. Then you can change the assay to dorothea, set the identities to your cell types and run FindAllMarkers(). This will return you a list of differentially activated TFs. Same workflow is for sure also possible if you are working with the SingleCellExperiment object.

@jamrute
Copy link
Author

jamrute commented Mar 5, 2021

Thank you @christianholland . This was an interesting idea, and I ran the Find All Markers DGE using the Viper scores.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants