Table 3 |
||||||
|
Proportion of true positives and power to detect true QTLs in each analysis. |
||||||
|
Power2 |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Data |
Approach |
TP1 |
overall |
>1% |
[0.5–1]% |
<0.5% |
|
|
||||||
|
Raw |
Blossoc (15)3 |
0.49 |
0.74 |
1 |
1 |
0.70 |
|
Blossoc (65) |
0.68 |
0.42 |
0.87 |
0.71 |
0.24 |
|
|
SMA |
0.61 |
0.65 |
1 |
0.71 |
0.55 |
|
|
SMA Bagging |
0.87 |
0.40 |
1 |
0.71 |
0.18 |
|
|
Corrected |
Blossoc (15) |
1 |
0.33 |
0.87 |
0.57 |
0.15 |
|
Blossoc (12) |
1 |
0.40 |
1 |
0.71 |
0.18 |
|
|
SMA |
1 |
0.35 |
0.87 |
0.43 |
0.21 |
|
|
|
||||||
|
1 – The proportion of true positives is the proportion of detected QTLs that were true. Positive match between detected and true QTLs was based on a maximum distance of 5 cM. 2 – Overall power is the proportion of true loci that were detected. This power is further subdivided according to QTL categories based on the true effect size: >1% (8 QTLs), between 0.5 and 1% inclusive (7 QTLs), and <0.5% (33 QTLs) of the total phenotypic variance. 3 – Numbers between brackets for Blossoc are the threshold used for selecting peaks. |
||||||
|
Ledur et al. BMC Proceedings 2009 3(Suppl 1):S9 |
||||||
