Abstract

In quantitative proteomics, the false discovery rate (FDR) can be defined as the number of false positives within statistically significant changes in expression. False positives accumulate during the simultaneous testing of expression changes across hundreds or thousands of protein or peptide species when univariate tests such as the Student's t test are used. Currently most researchers rely solely on the estimation of p values and a significance threshold, but this approach may result in false positives because it does not account for the multiple testing effect. For each species, a measure of significance in terms of the FDR can be calculated, producing individual q values. The q value maintains power by allowing the investigator to achieve an acceptable level of true or false positives within the calls of significance. The q value approach relies on the use of the correct statistical test for the experimental design. In this situation, a uniform p value frequency distribution when there are no differences in expression between two samples should be obtained. Here we report a bias in p value distribution in the case of a three-dye DIGE experiment where no changes in expression are occurring. The bias was shown to arise from correlation in the data from the use of a common internal standard. With a two-dye schema, where each sample has its own internal standard, such bias was removed, enabling the application of the q value to two different proteomics studies. In the case of the first study, we demonstrate that 80% of calls of significance by the more traditional method are false positives. In the second, we show that calculating the q value gives the user control over the FDR. These studies demonstrate the power and ease of use of the q value in correcting for multiple testing. This work also highlights the need for robust experimental design that includes the appropriate application of statistical procedures.

Highlights

  • In quantitative proteomics, the false discovery rate (FDR) can be defined as the number of false positives within statistically significant changes in expression

  • Accurate application of the q value procedure assumes the correct calculation of p values, which is dependent on the use of an appropriate statistical test

  • A uniform distribution of p values in a situation where no difference exist between groups can be used to test whether the correct statistical test is being utilized

Read more

Summary

The abbreviations used are

2D, two-dimensional; FDR, false discovery rate; SA, standardized abundance; ECA, E. carotovora; PCER, per comparison error rate; FWER, familywise error rate; Q, quantile. When testing 1000 protein species, the PCER threshold of 0.05 would be divided by the number of tests leading to the stringent familywise error rate (FWER) of 0.00005 This approach fails to consider betweenfeature dependence within the data and does not take into account the risk of false positives associated with the proportion of tests for which no change occurs. Several FDR controlling procedures exist; the q value is easy to use, maintains power, is tolerant of between-feature dependence, and leads to an output that allows the experimenter to select an appropriate FDR This makes the q value approach ideal for use in quantitative proteomics. Some studies applying microarray methods of analysis to protein expression data have incorporated multiple testing controlling procedures and found that the number of protein species selected as significant was reduced (8, 18 –20).

B: Two dye schema
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call