The role of parametric linkage methods in complex trait analyses using microsatellites

BMC Genomic Data

Table 1 Genetic models from PAP segregation analysis for adjusted traits.

Adjusted trait	Model	m(AA)^a	m(Aa)	m(aa)	SD	f(a)^b	-2lnLIKE	χ^2d	p-value^d
ecb21	Dom	-0.44	[-0.44]^c	10.53	3.56	0.231	2625.5	37.5	0.000000
ecb21	CoDom	-0.12	14.31	16.73	3.95	0.008	2663.0
ntth1	Dom	-0.02	[-0.02]	1.12	0.37	0.143	815.9	21.2	0.000004
ntth1	CoDom	-0.01	1.03	3.50	0.38	0.008	837.1
ntth2	Dom	-0.05	[-0.05]	1.35	0.49	0.202	N/A^e
ntth3	Dom	-0.03	[-0.03]	1.38	0.52	0.167	1429.5	13.54	0.000234
ntth3	CoDom	0.00	1.59	2.21	0.56	0.001	1443.1
ntth4	Dom	-0.01	[-0.01]	1.66	0.55	0.094	N/A
ttdt1	Dom	-0.06	[-0.06]	1.85	0.61	0.206	N/A
ttdt2	Dom	-0.03	[-0.03]	2.25	0.74	0.134	1997.5	12.96	0.003180
ttdt2	CoDom	-0.01	2.91	3.50	0.77	0.004	2010.4
ttdt3	Dom	-0.05	[-0.05]	2.25	0.86	0.162	N/A
ttdt4	Dom	-0.01	[2.73]	2.73	1.02	0.003	N/A
ttth1	Dom	-0.05	[-0.05]	1.14	0.48	0.218	N/A
ttth2	Dom	0.00	[2.12]	2.12	0.76	0.002	N/A
ttth3	Dom	-0.03	[-0.03]	1.67	0.74	0.132	N/A
ttth4	Dom	-0.02	[-0.02]	1.99	0.65	0.106	N/A

^am(AA) = trait mean value of genotype AA
^bf(a) = frequency of allele a
^c[ ] = parameter fixed to equal homozygote value
^dThe chi-square and p-values are for the co-dominant (CoDom) vs. dominant (Dom) model comparisons, when the co-dominant model could be fit
^eN/A = -2lnLIKE not presented because no comparison was possible

ISSN: 2730-6844