Skip to main content
8 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Oct 19, 2011 at 19:23 vote accept Arun
Oct 19, 2011 at 15:38 answer added Karl timeline score: 1
Oct 19, 2011 at 13:12 comment added Karl I would take it that the 5 and 251 are draws from two independent negative binomials. I'll try to write a more complete answer later today, though perhaps someone else will pick up on this and answer before me.
Oct 19, 2011 at 11:49 comment added Arun Hi Karl, Thank you again for your reply. Here, 251 and 322 are the total counts, which are similar to the models for gene expression. However, to fit the model using GLM, you know in this case that a negative binomial (or quasi-poisson) is deemed (or the right choice). When I take the ratios, do you think it is okay can estimate the model parameters without knowing what model (or distribution) this ratio would follow? I am not so informed about this part of statistics... If not, at the moment, as you say, chi-square seems to be the best option.
Oct 19, 2011 at 11:09 comment added Karl I see. Well, if one were generally comparing the 251 and 322 with some GLM with a negative binomial model, you could use the same sort of model to compare the ratios.
Oct 19, 2011 at 8:05 comment added Arun Yes, I could. And that's how I planned. However, analogous to my problem, from literature on gene expression, people used fisher test, with which statisticians aren't usually happy with. I may be confusing things here. But the general argument is that fisher test does not account for dispersion across biological replicates. That's the reason for model fitting and variance/dispersion estimation. I just assumed this is more or less relevant to my problem as well.
Oct 19, 2011 at 2:44 comment added Karl Why not just add across libraries and do a $\chi^2$ test, of 5:251 vs 22:322?
Oct 19, 2011 at 0:19 history asked Arun CC BY-SA 3.0