IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bep/jhubio/1050.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

When Should One Subtract Background Fluorescence in cDNA Microarrays?

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Scharpf

    (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics)

  • Christine Iacobuzio-Donahue

    (Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Department of Pathology)

  • Giovanni Parmigiani

    (Johns Hopkins University, Department of Oncology and Department of Biostatistics)

Abstract

Complementary DNA (cDNA) microarrays are a powerful tool for genomic analysis, but have noise components that make inferences regarding gene expression inefficient and potentially misleading. Background fluorescence, whether attributable to non-specific binding or other sources, is an important component of noise. The decision to subtract background fluorescence from foreground signal has been controversial, with no clear criteria for determining circumstances that may favor, or disfavor, background correction. While it is generally accepted that subtracting background reduces bias but ncreases variance in the estimates of the ratios of interest,no formal analysis of the bias-variance trade off of background subtraction has been undertaken. In this paper, we use simulation to systematically examine the bias-variance trade off under a variety of possible experimental conditions. Our simulation is based on data obtained from a self versus self microarray experiment and is free of distributional assumptions. Our results identify factors that are important for determining whether to background subtract,including the correlation of foreground to background signal. Using these results we develop recommendations for diagnostic visualizations that can help decisions about background subtraction.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Scharpf & Christine Iacobuzio-Donahue & Giovanni Parmigiani, 2004. "When Should One Subtract Background Fluorescence in cDNA Microarrays?," Johns Hopkins University Dept. of Biostatistics Working Paper Series 1050, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    • Handle: RePEc:bep:jhubio:1050
    Note: oai:bepress.com:jhubiostat-1050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1050&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:1050. 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.