Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ENH: distance decay notebook by Ashkaan #191

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

wasade
Copy link
Member

@wasade wasade commented Jan 22, 2016

No description provided.

"library(dplyr)\n",
"\n",
"## I was given a 1-column csv file with sample IDs to include in my analyses\n",
"use <- read.csv('filepath/file.csv', header = TRUE)\n",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this the single sample file? If so, can we integrate with the current repo structure?

"source": [
"The next section performs individual analyses at the state-level, and performs Benjamini-Hochberg correction for multiple comparisons and spits them out into a summary table, so that you can evaluate which states (if any) display significant distance-decay relationships and plot those particular states, if you want.\n",
"\n",
"In the first version of the data I recieved, I had to manually clean up multiple discrepancies in state namings (e.g., state labels for Colorado were inputted as both 'CO' and 'Colorado'. Not sure if this has been corrected in the new data. If not, let me know and we can figure out a quick solution."
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The state names are corrected in the new version, so we shouldn't need to update. But, we're currently storing state information for states outside of the US and that can give weird results.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That sounds good. Is there anything I can do on my end to help?

AF

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 9:02 AM, J W Debelius notifications@github.com
wrote:

In ipynb/agp_distance_decay.ipynb
#191 (comment):

  • " panel.border = element_blank(), panel.grid.minor = element_blank(), \n",
  • " panel.background = element_blank()) +\n",
  • " theme(axis.line = element_line(color = 'black'))\n",
  • "\n",
  • "## and we perform a permutational test to assess significance\n",
  • "mant.mod <- mantel(comm.dist, gc.dist, method = 'spear', permutations = 999)\n",
  • "mant.mod"
  • ]
  • },
  • {
  • "cell_type": "markdown",
  • "metadata": {},
  • "source": [
  • "The next section performs individual analyses at the state-level, and performs Benjamini-Hochberg correction for multiple comparisons and spits them out into a summary table, so that you can evaluate which states (if any) display significant distance-decay relationships and plot those particular states, if you want.\n",
  • "\n",
  • "In the first version of the data I recieved, I had to manually clean up multiple discrepancies in state namings (e.g., state labels for Colorado were inputted as both 'CO' and 'Colorado'. Not sure if this has been corrected in the new data. If not, let me know and we can figure out a quick solution."

The state names are corrected in the new version, so we shouldn't need to
update. But, we're currently storing state information for states outside
of the US and that can give weird results.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
https://github.com/biocore/American-Gut/pull/191/files#r50722181.

"## compute Canberra distances\n",
"comm.dist <- vegdist(t(dat.rel.trans), method = 'canberra')\n",
"comm.dist <- as.matrix(comm.dist)\n",
"\n",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Based on the notes that came in october, this used to be Bray-Curtis distance. Is there a reason to use Canberra here over Bray-Curtis or UniFrac?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I thought Canberra had better behaved residuals. Can revert to Bray if you prefer.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants