IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bep/jhubio/1046.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

To Pool or Not to Pool: A Question of Microarray Experimental Design

Author

Listed:
  • Christina Kendziorski

    (Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin-Madison)

  • Rafael Irizarry

    (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

  • K. Chen

    (McArdle Laboratory for Cancer Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison)

  • J.D. Haag

    (McArdle Laboratory for Cancer Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison)

  • M.N. Gould

    (McArdle Laboratory for Cancer Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison)

Abstract

Over 10% of the data sets catalogued in the Gene Expression Omnibus Database involve messenger RNA samples that have been pooled prior to hybridization. Pooling affects data quality and inference, but the exact effects are not yet known as pooling has not been systematically studied in the context of microarray experiments. Here we report on the results of an experiment designed to evaluate the utility of pooling and the impact on identifying differentially expressed genes. We find that inference for most genes is not adversely affected by pooling and we recommend that pooling be done when fewer than three arrays are used in each condition. For larger designs, pooling does not significantly improve inferences if few subjects are pooled. The realized benefits in this case do not outweigh the price paid for loss of individual specific information. Pooling is beneficial when many subjects are pooled, provided independent samples contribute to multiple pools.

Suggested Citation

  • Christina Kendziorski & Rafael Irizarry & K. Chen & J.D. Haag & M.N. Gould, 2004. "To Pool or Not to Pool: A Question of Microarray Experimental Design," Johns Hopkins University Dept. of Biostatistics Working Paper Series 1046, Berkeley Electronic Press.
  • Handle: RePEc:bep:jhubio:1046
    Note: oai:bepress.com:jhubiostat-1046
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1046&context=jhubiostat
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bep:jhubio:1046. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.bepress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.