Skip to main content
. 2024 Mar 7;15:1286352. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1286352

Table 2.

Predicted vs actual gene expression*.

Gene AIC: no random effects AIC: random effects Top random effect model Models in 2 AIC Intercept SE p-value Slope SE p-value (0) p-value (1) R2 cond. R2 marg.
IgG 193.66 195.66 1 0,1 0.09 0.12 0.48 0.83 0.21 0.00 0.65 0.20 0.19
IgM 214.59 213.77 2 2,3,0 -0.28 0.14 0.05 0.88 0.24 0.00 0.64 0.55 0.29
IgA 187.50 187.15 1 0,1 -0.09 0.14 0.53 0.67 0.19 0.00 0.09 0.32 0.18
IgE 227.66 228.45 1 0,1 -0.14 0.20 0.47 0.68 0.19 0.00 0.10 0.28 0.16
CD4 163.54 165.54 1 0,1 -0.08 0.13 0.56 0.80 0.17 0.00 0.23 NA 0.26
CD8 183.19 185.12 1 0,1 0.04 0.14 0.77 0.67 0.29 0.02 0.26 0.11 0.07
CD11 156.39 158.39 1 0,1 -0.07 0.09 0.40 0.63 0.19 0.00 0.05 NA 0.14
CD16 151.61 153.17 1 0,1 0.03 0.10 0.77 0.77 0.15 0.00 0.13 0.35 0.29
MHC-II 223.48 225.48 1 0,1 -0.31 0.24 0.20 0.40 0.34 0.25 0.08 NA 0.02
NKG2D 209.60 210.51 1 0,1 -0.24 0.18 0.18 0.65 0.25 0.01 0.17 0.20 0.09
IgM : IgG 163.89 165.90 1 0,1 -0.42 0.15 0.01 0.29 0.25 0.24 0.01 NA 0.02
CD4:CD8 136.43 137.10 1 0,1 -0.03 0.11 0.79 1.12 0.22 0.00 0.60 0.43 0.32

*Table shows results for each gene model. Each model was run using four different model types: 0, no random effects, 1, random intercept, 2, random slope, 3, both random intercept and random slope. Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) was reported for model 0, as well as the best fitting random effect model. All models within the top 2 AIC are reported. For the best fitting random effect model, the intercept, slope, standard errors (SE), p-value and R2 values are reported. Each top model was rerun to test if the relationship between the predicted and actual gene expression was significantly different from 1 and 0, with p-values for both analyses reported. Bold indicates significant values.