Skip to main content

Table 2 True positive rate analysis for group size 10+10

From: Comparison of normalization methods for the analysis of metagenomic gene abundance data

Method Human gut I Human gut II Marine
  B U B U B U
TMM 0.62 0.58 0.63 0.59 0.66 0.61
RLE 0.63 0.55 0.62 0.60 0.66 0.59
CSS 0.61 0.53 0.65 0.55 0.69 0.61
RCSS 0.61 0.56 0.62 0.59 0.65 0.50
Quantile-quantile 0.69 0.56 0.64 0.54 0.67 0.46
Upper quartile 0.61 0.49 0.63 0.56 0.66 0.42
Median 0.62 0.50 0.64 0.52 0.68 0.59
Total count 0.61 0.54 0.63 0.57 0.65 0.49
Rarefying 0.63 0.57 0.49 0.44 0.66 0.50
  1. True positive rate at a fixed false positive rate of 0.01 for nine normalization methods and three metagenomic datasets using a group size of 10+10 for 10% DAGs with an average fold-change of 3.
  2. B: balanced, 50% of effects added to each group.
  3. U: unbalanced, 100% effects added to one group only
\