Jane Marks

Daniel Agyapong, Jeffrey Ryan Propster, Jane Marks et al.

Microorganisms are found in almost every environment, including the soil, water, air, and inside other organisms, like animals and plants. While some microorganisms cause diseases, most of them help in biological processes such as decomposition, fermentation and nutrient cycling. A lot of research has gone into studying microbial communities in various environments and how their interactions and relationships can provide insights into various diseases. Co-occurrence network inference algorithms help us understand the complex associations of micro-organisms, especially bacteria. Existing network inference algorithms employ techniques such as correlation, regularized linear regression, and conditional dependence, which have different hyper-parameters that determine the sparsity of the network. Previous methods for evaluating the quality of the inferred network include using external data, and network consistency across sub-samples, both which have several drawbacks that limit their applicability in real microbiome composition data sets. We propose a novel cross-validation method to evaluate co-occurrence network inference algorithms, and new methods for applying existing algorithms to predict on test data. Our empirical study shows that the proposed method is useful for hyper-parameter selection (training) and comparing the quality of the inferred networks between different algorithms (testing).

Daniel Agyapong, Julien Chiquet, Jane Marks et al.

Multivariate count models are often justified by their ability to capture latent dependence, but researchers receive little guidance on when this added structure improves on simpler penalized marginal Poisson regression. We study this question using real microbiome data under a unified held-out evaluation framework. For count prediction, we compare PLN and GLMNet(Poisson) on 20 datasets spanning 32 to 18,270 samples and 24 to 257 taxa, using held-out Poisson deviance under leave-one-taxon-out prediction with 3-fold sample cross-validation rather than synthetic or in-sample criteria. For network inference, we compare PLNNetwork and GLMNet(Poisson) neighborhood selection on five publicly available datasets with experimentally validated microbial interaction truth. PLN outperforms GLMNet(Poisson) on most count-prediction datasets, with gains up to 38 percent. The primary predictor of the winner is the sample-to-taxon ratio, with mean absolute correlation as the strongest secondary signal and overdispersion as an additional predictor. PLNNetwork performs best on broad undirected interaction benchmarks, whereas GLMNet(Poisson) is better aligned with local or directional effects. Taken together, these results provide guidance for choosing between latent multivariate count models and penalized Poisson regression in biological count prediction and interaction recovery.