Hello everyone, I need to write limitation part I read lots of article (most of them confusing) but what are bullet points for using micro array vs RNAseq techniques ?
Does not provide exact RNA abundance (NanoString can, as far as I know)
Difficult to detect low abundance RNA species (their signal may 'vanish' into the background noise)
Difficult to measure high abundance transcripts accurately, as their signal 'saturates' the fluorescent detector
Biased by GC content (although there is an algorithm to correct for this, gcRMA)
Biased by pseudogenes that may be transcribed (probes may bind to parts of both the gene and the pseudogene)
RNA-seq
Data analysis methods are not as mature as those for microarray
(although it feels like we're just about there)
Does not provide exact RNA abundance (NanoString can, as far as I know)
Biased by GC content
Biased by PCR and optical duplicates
Biased due to sequence similarity and the presence of pseudogenes during re-alignment to the reference genome/transcriptome
Polyadenylated and non-polyadenylated RNA species detection require
different protocols
There are exceptions to each of these limitations, of course. People will always find an exception or some rare situation where something does not hold true.
You earned the moderator status because of the depth of your knowledge and practical assistance that you provided to users in that time. AFAIK, only @Istvan can promote people to that status. You received that privilege much earlier than many who have been participating on the site for much longer.
As a rule of thumb, questions that are a couple of lines or less, are not specific about scope/needs and/or ask for a directed solution (e.g. want a python script to do X) are all likely candidates for not providing a full answer. You can ask that the users clarify their needs and/or add more information. Does not always work though, since there are many other eager participants that step in. Guiding users to be more self reliant and succinct about questions they ask is an ongoing task.
Yes it has been crazy with now >7000 points in ~12 weeks. This rate will slow down though. I joined here because I recently had more free time than I've ever had in 15 years. Oh well, glad to help out.
These posts (like the question here) appear every day and I wonder why the person can't just do literature search of their own. Thanks for the tips - I'll be more attentive in future.
Know that you are trying to be super helpful but you are essentially answering an assignment question for OP.
Difficult to know which is which. I've only been here just under 3 months and am already a Moderator (?)
You earned the moderator status because of the depth of your knowledge and practical assistance that you provided to users in that time. AFAIK, only @Istvan can promote people to that status. You received that privilege much earlier than many who have been participating on the site for much longer.
As a rule of thumb, questions that are a couple of lines or less, are not specific about scope/needs and/or ask for a directed solution (e.g. want a python script to do X) are all likely candidates for not providing a full answer. You can ask that the users clarify their needs and/or add more information. Does not always work though, since there are many other eager participants that step in. Guiding users to be more self reliant and succinct about questions they ask is an ongoing task.
Yes it has been crazy with now >7000 points in ~12 weeks. This rate will slow down though. I joined here because I recently had more free time than I've ever had in 15 years. Oh well, glad to help out.
These posts (like the question here) appear every day and I wonder why the person can't just do literature search of their own. Thanks for the tips - I'll be more attentive in future.
Many thanks, its looks very useful.