We do not recommend attempting WGCNA on a data set consisting of fewer than 15 samples. In a typical
high-throughput setting, correlations on fewer than 15 samples will simply be too noisy for the network to
be biologically meaningful. If at all possible, one should have at least 20 samples; as with any analysis
methods, more samples usually lead to more robust and refined results.
Probesets or genes may be filtered by mean expression or variance (or their robust analogs such as median and median absolute deviation, MAD) since low-expressed or non-varying genes usually represent noise. Whether it is better to filter by mean expression or variance is a matter of debate; both have advantages and disadvantages, but more importantly, they tend to filter out similar sets of genes since mean and variance are usually related.
We do not recommend filtering genes by differential expression. WGCNA is designed to be an
unsupervised analysis method that clusters genes based on their expression profiles. Filtering genes by
differential expression will lead to a set of correlated genes that will essentially form a single (or a
few highly correlated) modules. It also completely invalidates the scale-free topology assumption, so
choosing soft thresholding power by scale-free topology fit will fail.
In general, we attempt to select suitable defaults that work well in multiple applications. However, in certain cases we keep 'simple' or historical default settings for backward compatibility and reproducibility, while for new calculations we recommend settings that differ from the defaults. Some of the settings are listed below.
type = "signed"or
type = "signed hybrid"in functions such as
accuracyMeasures, adjacency, chooseOneHubInEachModule, chooseTopHubInEachModule, nearestNeighborConnectivity, nearestNeighborConnectivityMS, orderBranchesUsingHubGenes, softConnectivityand possibly others (please see the help file for each function if in doubt). Some functions use the argument
networkTypeto select network type; notable examples are
blockwiseModules, blockwiseConsensusModules, blockwiseIndividualTOMs, consensusTOM, intramodularConnectivity, modulePreservation, pickSoftThreshold, TOMsimilarityFromExpr, vectorTOMbut there are others as well. Again, please read the help file if in doubt.
bicor. Many WGCNA functions take the argument
corFncthat allows one to specify an alternative correlation function to the standard
bicoris one option. Additional arguments to the correlation function can be specified using the argument
corOptions(depending on function, this argument may require one of two alternate forms, please see the help for each function for details). In certain functions, notably the of the
blockwisefamily, correlation function cannot be specified directly as a function; rather, one must use the argument
corTypeto specify either Pearson or biweight mid-correlation.
Important cautionary notes regarding the use of bicor. The biweight mid-correlation works very well in a variety of settings but in some situations it will produce unwanted results.
maxPOutliers.The default version of the biweight mid-correlation, described in Langfelder and Horvath (2011) (link to article), can produce unwanted results when the data have a bi-modal distribution (e.g., when a gene expression depends heavily on a binary variable such as disease status or genotype) or when one of the variables entering the correlation is itself binary (or ordinal). For this reason, we strongly recommend using the argument
maxPOutliers = 0.05or
0.10whenever the biweight midcorrelation is used. This argument essentially forces
bicorto never regard more than the specified proportion of samples as outliers.
xto binary variable
ysuch as sample traits, one can use argument
robustY = FALSEto turn off the robust treatment for the y argment of
bicor. This results in a hybrid robust-Pearson correlation as described in Langfelder and Horvath (2011). The hybrid correlation can also be used when one of the inputs is numeric but known to not have any outliers.
Yes. As far as WGCNA is concerned, working with (properly normalized) RNA-seq data isn't really any different from working with (properly normalized) microarray data.
We suggest removing features whose counts are consistently low (for example, removing all features that have a count of less than say 10 in more than 90% of the samples) because such low-expressed features tend to reflect noise and correlations based on counts that are mostly zero aren't really meaningful. The actual thresholds should be based on experimental design, sequencing depth and sample counts.
We then recommend a variance-stabilizing transformation. For example, package
DESeq2 implements the function
we have found useful, but one could also start with normalized counts
(or RPKM/FPKM data) and log-transform them using
For highly expressed features, the differences between full variance stabilization and a simple log
transformation are small.
Whether one uses RPKM, FPKM, or simply normalized counts doesn't make a whole lot of difference for WGCNA analysis as long as all samples were processed the same way. These normalization methods make a big difference if one wants to compare expression of gene A to expression of gene B; but WGCNA calculates correlations for which gene-wise scaling factors make no difference. (Sample-wise scaling factors of course do, so samples do need to be normalized.)
If data come from different batches, we recommend to check for batch effects and, if needed, adjust for them. We use ComBat for batch effect removal but other methods should also work.
Finally, we usually check quantile scatterplots to make sure there are
no systematic shifts between samples; if sample quantiles show
correlations (which they usually do), quantile normalization can be used to remove this effect.
Data heterogeneity may affect any statistical analysis, and even more so an unsupervised one such as WGCNA. What, if any, modifications should be made to the analysis depends crucially on whether the heterogeneity (or its underlying driver) is considered "interesting" for the question the analyst is trying to answer, or not. If one is lucky, the main driver of sample differences is the treatment/condition one studies, in which case WGCNA can be applied to the data as is. Unfortunately, often the heterogeneity drivers are uninteresting and should be adjusted for. Such factors can be technical (batch effects, technical variables such as post-mortem interval etc.) or biological (e.g., sex, tissue, or species differences).
If one has a categorical source of variation (e.g., sex or tissue differences) and the number of samples in each category is large enough (at least 30, say) to construct a network in each category separately, it may be worthwhile to carry out a consensus module analysis (Tutorial II, see WGCNA Tutorials). Because this analysis constructs a network in each category separately, the between-category variation does not affect the analysis.
If it is desired to construct a single network for all samples,
the unwanted or uninteresting sources of large variation in the data should be adjusted for. For categorical
(ordinal) factors we recommend using the function
ComBat (from the package
Users who have never used ComBat before should read the help file for
ComBat and work
vignette("sva") at the R prompt) to make sure they use
For continuous sources of variation (e.g., postmortem interval), one can use simple linear regression to adjust the data. There may be more advanced methods out there that also allow the use of covariates and protect from over-correction.
Whichever method is used, we caution the user that removal of unwanted sources of variation is never perfect
and it can, in some cases, lead to removal of true interesting signal, and in rare cases it may introduce
spurious association signal. Thus, only sources of relatively large variation should be removed.
First, the user should ensure that variables (probesets, genes etc.) have not been filtered by differential expression with respect to a sample trait. See item 2 above for details about beneficial and detrimental filtering genes or probesets.
If the scale-free topology fit index fails to reach values above 0.8 for reasonable powers (less than 15 for unsigned or signed hybrid networks, and less than 30 for signed networks) and the mean connectivity remains relatively high (in the hundreds or above), chances are that the data exhibit a strong driver that makes a subset of the samples globally different from the rest. The difference causes high correlation among large groups of genes which invalidates the assumption of the scale-free topology approximation.
Lack of scale-free topology fit by itself does not invalidate the data, but should be looked into carefully. It always helps to plot the sample clustering tree and any technical or biological sample information below it as in Figure 2 of Tutorial I, section 1; strong clusters in the clustering tree indicate globally different groups of samples. It could be the result a technical effect such as a batch effect, biological heterogeneity (e.g., a data set consisting of samples from 2 different tissues), or strong changes between conditions (say in a time series). One should investigate carefully whether there is sample heterogeneity, what drives the heterogeneity, and whether the data should be adjusted (see previous point).
If the lack of scale-free topology fit turns out to be caused by an interesting biological variable that one does not want to remove (i.e., adjust the data for), the appropriate soft-thresholding power can be chosen based on the number of samples as in the table below. This table has been updated in December 2017 to make the resulting networks conservative.
|Number of samples||Unsigned and signed hybrid networks||Signed networks|
|Less than 20||9||18|
|more than 40||6||12|
Many of the WGCNA functions take multiple arguments that control various subtleties in network construction
and module identification. In general we attempt to provide defaults that work reasonably well in most
common situations. However, in some cases we, over time, find that a different setting is more
appropriate. In most cases we keep the old default for reproducibility.
TOMsimilarityFromExpr uses a slightly different default setting for
TOM calculation in unsigned
networks. This should produce TOM that's slightly easier to interpret but is slightly different from what
one gets by calculating a standard unsigned adjacency and then TOM using
To get the same result, use the argument
TOMType="unsigned" when calling
This error nearly always occurs because R was not able to load the WGCNA package. In R, type
If you get an error in function
pickSoftThreshold, please see item 1 in Runtime
errors. Otherwise, please send Peter Langfelder an email. It is certainly possible that
the tutorials still contain
undiscovered bugs, or that our changes to the package or changes to R have broken the offending tutorial.
The most likely culprit is the size of your data set. In particular, Sections 2.a of Tutorials I and II
assume that you have less than 5000 probes in your data set. If you have more than that, please look at
the corresponding section 2.c (Dealing with large data sets). Modify the argument maxBlockSize to suit
the capabilities of your computer; the details are described in Section 2.c of the corresponding tutorial.
Multiple user reports indicate that parallel (multi-threaded or cluster) calculations fail when run from
third-party R GUI environments such as RStudio. If you use RStudio or other environments not supplied by R
Core team, please disable parallel execution by
disableWGCNAThreads() before running the
Although most modern processsors have multiple cores, some environments, most notably clusters (such the Sun
Grid Engine clusters), make only one processor core available to each process. Attempting to start multiple
threads often leads to error messages similar to this example:
thread 0 could not be started successfully. Error code: 11.
If this happens, please disable threading (for example, using the function
Several Mac users have reported malloc errors such as
R(9073,0xa013dfa0) malloc: *** mmap(size=95006720) failed (error code=12)
*** error: can't allocate region
*** set a breakpoint in malloc_error_break to debug
From all we know this is a spurious and harmless message, and can be ignored. For all C- and gcc-savvy Mac users out there, if you find a cause and solution, please let us know.
Such crashes are often the result of unusual data that cause a condition we have not thought about, or subtle abnormalities in the data. Here are a few situations in which we have seen our code crash:
N/A, while R expects
NAand everything else is treated as a character string. It is best to sort such problems out at the source, but it may not always be possible, and the user will need to run a version of
charData = apply(as.matrix(data), 2, as.character); numData = apply(charData, 2, as.numeric);
Some errors may be caused by conversion between matrices and data frames. For most purposes, a
data.frame and a
matrix are equivalent and many functions will run with both types of arguments. One big exception
is the handling of column names. While column names of matrices are fairly arbitrary column names of data frames
must begin with a letter, underscore, or a dot. This can be a problem if, for example, the expression data are
stored in a
matrix and the probe set idetifiers begin with a number, for example,
"1552612_at". When converted to a data frame, R will prepend an "X" to each invalid column name,
making the example
"X1552612_at". Such changes may cause errors, for example, in the function
plotNetworkHeatmap and others.
Some of our screening functions calculate q-values associated with a family of statistical tests. It is not uncommon that the q-value calculation fails because the p-values have an unusual distribution. We will attempt to catch such errors and prevent them from derailing the entire screening calculation.
We have received scattered reports of crashes on Mac OSX 10.6.x (10.5.x systems do not exhibit this error). The
symptoms are various hard crashes (freeze, segmentation faults and similar) that happen when trying to
execute almost anything after loading the WGCNA package version 1.00 and below.
The culprit turned out to be wrong and/or
incorrectly installed Tcl/Tk. For this reason we have removed the Tcl/Tk dependency starting with WGCNA
version 1.10. Please install the new version. If your problems still persist, please contact Peter
Before you spend time trying to solve an installation problem with the downloaded package, please consider
installing the package from CRAN. We understand that upgrading R can seem like a bit of a hassle, but in the end
it's worth it.
As of R version 2.14.0, the package
impute has been withdrawn from CRAN and is now available
exclusively from Bioconductor. To install it, type the following lines in an R session:
install.packages("WGCNA"). If you for some reason cannot or do not want to update your R, please look at the installation instructions and make sure you have the required XCode tools installed.
gfortran.pkgis also necessary. This may be a new feature of R as of version 2.9.0.
As we continue to develop and improve the methods contained in this package, from time to time the default calculations methods and arguments may change. We do our best to preserve options that will allow the user to replicate old results using a new package version, and we document the changes in the changelog. If you cannot figure out the necessary arguments to reproduce an old result, please send Peter Langfelder an email.
When constructing a network from a data set of a typical genomic size (i.e., between 10 000 and 30 000
genes or other variables), the most time consuming step is the calculation of Topological Overlap Matrix
which involves multiplying matrices with tens of thousands of rows and columns. With a standard R
distribution, this may take multiple hours even on a modern workstation since matrix multiplication in
standard R does not take advantage of multi-threading (parallel execution). It is possible to speed up
this process by a factor of 10-100 by installing a speed-optimized Basic Linear Algebra Subprograms (BLAS)
library and compiling R against it. The process of compiling R against an enhanced BLAS library is
described in the R
installation and adminitration manual.
Compiling R on Linux and Unix flavors is usually relatively simple and straightforward. On Mac OSX and
(more so) on Windows it requires installing additional tools and packages.
Although it is helpful to have administrator privileges to
compile and install R, it is usually not necessary. See the R
installation and adminitration manual for full details.
Some of the WGCNA code is written to take advantage of parallel execution to speed up the calculations. There are two main parallel computation mechanisms used by WGCNA: the compiled functions cor and bicor use POSIX threading for a part but not all of the calculation. This parallel code is only available on platforms that have POSIX threads available (various Linux and Unix flavors and Mac OS). It is not available on Windows. Some functions (such as pickSoftThreshold) are able to use POSIX threads where they are available and use SNOW clusters where multi-threading is not available. The users should be aware that POSIX and cluster parallel execution are very different and are not interchangeable; in fact, many cluster environments only allocate a single core to each process ("job") and attempting to start additional threads leads to errors (see Runtime errors below).
Even on systems where threading is available it is disabled by default. This is a conservative setting that may slow down the calculations but will also prevent WGCNA from grabbing all available processor cores. There are two ways to enable multi-threading:
to allow threading from within WGCNA. Multi-threading can be turned off
again using the function
disableWGCNAThreads(). See the help file for
allowWGCNAThreads() for more details.
for example, if you have 2 cores (or want to use 2 cores),
If you don't know what an
environment variable is, please use the above
allowWGCNAThreads() within R.
Please note that this setting does not affect the multi-threading status of the underlying BLAS library.
In short, no. There used to be one but it is hopelessly broken and out of date.