TABLE 3

Results with genetic scenario 2c

Methodsa%bΠ1cEmbedded Image dEmbedded Image eEmbedded Image fμgEmbedded Image hΔs/2i
Segment mapping1301001.02 ± 0.020.77 ± 0.070.37 ± 0.040.06 ± 0.070.43 ± 0.090.64 ± 0.08
2–5471001.03 ± 0.021.14 ± 0.080.00 ± 0.000.05 ± 0.071.50 ± 0.130.43 ± 0.07
6231001.03 ± 0.020.79 ± 0.070.32 ± 0.050.03 ± 0.080.44 ± 0.080.62 ± 0.10
Mixed model1531001.35 ± 0.030.67 ± 0.060.07 ± 0.080.79 ± 0.06
2–501.47 ± 0.040.84 ± 0.100.02 ± 0.070.74 ± 0.06
6471001.37 ± 0.040.70 ± 0.070.00 ± 0.080.81 ± 0.08
Random model1501001.34 ± 0.030.87 ± 0.07−0.26 ± 0.07
2–501.47 ± 0.041.03 ± 0.10−0.28 ± 0.06
6501001.37 ± 0.040.94 ± 0.07−0.33 ± 0.06
Fixed model143851.86 ± 0.060.00 ± 0.070.79 ± 0.07
2–501.92 ± 0.070.00 ± 0.070.72 ± 0.06
6571001.85 ± 0.070.00 ± 0.070.79 ± 0.08
  • The statistics are the average of 30 replicates. The average simulated mean QTL variance and Δ/2 were 0.48 and 0.54 for the first QTL and 0.42 and 0.55 for the second QTL.

  • a Segment (partition) order.

  • b Percentage of replicates where partition or segment 1 (the QTL position) corresponded to maximum likelihood.

  • c Power, computed as the percentage of replicates where LR exceeded the empirical 5% significance threshold (see Table 1), out of those where the maximum LR was at position 1.

  • d Residual variance estimate.

  • e Estimate of the genetic variance due to the complement of segment 1 (11-60 cM).

  • f Estimate of the genetic variance due to segment 1.

  • g Estimate of the general mean.

  • h Estimate of the mean difference due to the complement of segment 1.

  • i Estimate of the mean difference due to segment 1.