To answer your questions regarding how pathway enrichment analysis was conducted in the scientific article, I'll extract and organize the relevant information based on the provided sections: 1. **What tool was used for pathway enrichment analysis?** - The tool used for pathway enrichment analysis is KEGG (Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes). 2. **Was a tool version number provided?** - No, the article does not specify a version number for the KEGG tool. 3. **What gene set library was queried (e.g., GO, KEGG, Reactome or other)?** - The gene set library queried is the KEGG database. 4. **Was a background gene list defined for pathway enrichment analysis?** - Yes, the background gene list is implied as "the library prepared from the NT-0 pooled samples" was used as calibrators to normalize DEGs in other libraries. 5. **What statistical test was used for enrichment analysis?** - The article does not explicitly mention the specific statistical test used within KEGG pathway annotation, but mentions that pathways with a Q-value ≤ 0.05 are significantly enriched, suggesting some form of statistical testing. 6. **Was false discovery rate correction used to control the number of false positives in the pathway enrichment analysis?** - Yes, it is indicated that KEGG pathways with a Q-value ≤ 0.05 are considered significantly enriched, which suggests that FDR (False Discovery Rate) correction was applied. This information can be summarized into a table as follows: | Question | Answer | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------| | Tool used for pathway enrichment analysis | KEGG | | Tool version number provided | Not described | | Gene set library queried | KEGG database | | Background gene list defined | Yes (NT-0 pooled samples) | | Statistical test used for enrichment analysis | Not explicitly mentioned, Q-value ≤ 0.05 used | | False discovery rate correction applied | Yes |