text: user8713: I would like to ask if someone uses two different aligners to produce count matrices and then run the same alogrithm for DEG analysis, would it make sense to find the intersection of the DEGs in order to conclude to the "real" DEGS?
  
  user77: This sort of procedure is done in tool papers to benchmark results compared to different aligners/mappers. See the salmon or kallisto papers for examples. Using the intersect of DE results from different mappers will end up yielding somewhat conservative results, not unlike using different differential expression packages and taking the intersect of their outputs. In practice you could just take a more conservative p-value cut-off and save the hassle of using multiple tools, the results would end up being similar.
  
original_text: 8713: <p>I would like to ask if someone uses two different aligners to produce count matrices and then run the same alogrithm for DEG analysis, would it make sense to find the intersection of the DEGs in order to conclude to the &quot;real&quot; DEGS?</p>
   77: <p>This sort of procedure is done in tool papers to benchmark results compared to different aligners/mappers. See the salmon or kallisto papers for examples. Using the intersect of DE results from different mappers will end up yielding somewhat conservative results, not unlike using different differential expression packages and taking the intersect of their outputs. In practice you could just take a more conservative p-value cut-off and save the hassle of using multiple tools, the results would end up being similar.</p>
  