Hey Kiana!
I usually use 'Force Directed / Weighted' (that's what we use in our
plugin, Enrichment Map, btw); you should be able to select your edge
attribute from the layout menu as: Force Directed / ... (as an
alternative to 'unweighted' *). Try contrasting it to organic, which
does not use weights; sometimes, when networks are highly connected,
force directed results in overlapping nodes and label, a problem you
won't have with organic. Sometimes, spring embedded has the tendency
to create more disperse networks (with some nodes really far apart),
but it may serve you well in specific situations. I remotely remember
Gary mentioning problems with the BioLayout, not sure though.
* Make sure you can access your edge attribute from the attribute
browser, if you have doubts.
Also, you may want to play around with the correlation threshold a
bit, of course.
Ciao!
Daniele
On 11 Feb, 10:11, KTBCN <
kiana.toufi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a very simple problem and it's driving me nuts. I have a gene
> list with about 400 genes. The file is 3 columns plain and simple:
> column 1 is always "Per1" my gene of interest, column 2 is a list of
> various genes which show high expression correlation with Per1 (i.e.>= 0.7), and column 3 is the expression correlation value which is
>
> calculated using Pearson ranging from 0.7 to 1.0.
>
> I first load column 1 as source node and column 2 as target nodes and
> column 3 as edge attributes. I want to display the network in such a
> way that the more weight an edge has (i.e. the higher the Pearson
> value is -- closer to 1) the closer the node is situated to the hub
> gene Per1. And the lower the Pearson value is (i.e. the close it is to
> 0.7 my minimum) the farther it is.
>
> I have read in the documentation athttp://
opentutorials.cgl.ucsf.edu/index.php/Tutorial:Introduction_to_...