Skip to main content
. 2004 May 19;75(1):17–26. doi: 10.1086/421845

Table 2.

Empirical NCP under the Alternative Hypothesis from Samples of 1,000 Phenotypes from Nuclear Families

NCP from Mean TSa
NCP from TS Varianceb
Sibship Size,h2QTL, and h2PG HE VH SR VC HE VH SR VC
2:
 .2:
  .05 1.5 2.5 2.5 2.3 1.5 2.4 2.4 1.8
  .30 2.1 2.9 2.9 3.0 2.1 3.0 2.8 3.1
  .55 3.2 3.9 3.8 4.0 3.1 3.8 3.7 4.0
 .5:
  .00 13.1 17.9 17.3 19.2 11.5 15.9 14.2 16.4
  .25 18.4 22.3 21.3 25.8 15.5 19.7 16.9 24.7
4:
 .2:
  .05 4.9 8.0 8.2 7.5 5.5 9.6 9.8 7.3
  .30 6.7 9.2 10.1 9.5 7.5 11.2 12.5 10.3
  .55 9.5 11.5 13.4 12.6 10.7 13.5 16.1 13.4
 .5:
  .00 39.4 54.3 57.5 56.9 43.2 68.2 67.5 58.3
  .25 55.7 68.1 75.5 78.8 59.6 81.8 84.0 83.2
8:
 .2:
  .05 11.8 18.9 20.4 16.8 15.7 30.8 32.4 18.3
  .30 15.7 21.6 26.1 21.6 21.4 34.9 45.2 26.2
  .55 22.4 27.3 36.0 29.4 32.4 44.8 64.8 35.9
 .5:
  .00 93.2 128.4 148.3 117.6 158.9 291.0 310.9 153.4
  .25 130.6 159.9 199.7 163.2 230.3 348.5 414.7 225.3
a

E(TS)=1+NCP.

b

Var(TS)=2+4(NCP).