Table 2

Power of QTL identification
Analysis SI SII SIII
(trait) QTL 1% 5% 10% 1% 5% 10% 1% 5% 10%
Q1 66.8 82.0 86.6 65.8 80.2 84.2 67.6 77.2 79.6
MIM Q2 63.6 81.8 87.6 59.8 78.2 81.8
(T1) Q3 67.4 81.6 87.2 63.2 81.2 85.8 75.2 87.0 90.2
Q4 66.4 81.8 87.0 63.4 78.4 83.4
Q5 66.8 83.6 86.4 65.6 82.0 87.2 70.2 78.4 81.6
Q1 64.8 80.0 88.2
MIM Q2 64.8 80.0 84.8 74.4 85.4 89.8 64.2 74.2 76.4
(T2) Q3 65.6 79.8 83.4 76.4 86.0 90.0 76.4 88.4 91.2
Q4 66.0 82.4 87.0 77.4 87.6 92.0 74.6 86.0 88.0
Q5 68.4 83.0 88.8
Q1 65.6 81.4 86.0
MIM Q2 63.2 80.0 86.6
(T3) Q3 65.6 80.4 84.0 53.4 70.6 77.8
Q4 65.4 80.8 87.8
Q5 65.4 83.0 88.6
Q1 98.8 99.4 99.4 53.8 71.0 78.2 65.4 65.2 70.0
MTMIM Q2 98.0 98.0 98.2 89.0 94.4 95.6 64.6 66.6 68.0
Q3 97.0 97.4 97.4 96.6 97.0 97.2 94.4 96.4 97.0
Q4 98.4 98.8 99.0 87.6 93.2 94.6 74.8 77.4 78.2
Q5 98.6 98.6 98.6 57.2 71.8 78.4 65.6 66.2 68.0

Power (%) of QTL identification in the MIM and MTMIM models as observed in scenarios SI, SII and SIII across genome-wide significance levels (1, 5, and 10%) and LOD-1.5 support interval.

Costa E Silva et al.

Costa E Silva et al. BMC Genetics 2012 13:67   doi:10.1186/1471-2156-13-67

Open Data