Table 1.
1A. Discrete Populations | |||
p1, p2 | STRAT | TDT | χ2 |
P=.05 | |||
.5, .5 | .050 | .050 | .049 |
.1, .1 | .048 | .049 | .049 |
.5, .1 | .050 | .050 | .437 |
.9, .1 | .049 | .050 | .769 |
P=.01 | |||
.5, .5 | .011 | .010 | .011 |
.1, .1 | .009 | .010 | .009 |
.5, .1 | .009 | .010 | .260 |
.9, .1 | .010 | .009 | .649 |
P=10-3 | |||
.5, .1 | 0.83×10-3 | 0.98×10-3 | .112 |
.9, .1 | 0.83×10-3 | 0.90×10-3 | .506 |
P=10-4 | |||
.5, .1 | 0.97×10-4 | 0.95×10-4 | .046 |
.9, .1 | 0.80×10-4 | 0.76×10-4 | .370 |
1B. Admixed Populations | |||
p1, p2 | STRAT | TDT | χ2 |
P=.05 | |||
.5, .5 | .048 | .049 | .054 |
.1, .1 | .050 | .049 | .051 |
.5, .1 | .044 | .050 | .623 |
.9, .1 | .033 | .050 | .998 |
P=.01 | |||
.5, .5 | .010 | .010 | .010 |
.1, .1 | .010 | .009 | .010 |
.5, .1 | .008 | .010 | .370 |
.9, .1 | .005 | .010 | .979 |
P=10-3 | |||
.5, .1 | 0.83×10-3 | 0.86×10-3 | .156 |
.9, .1 | 0.45×10-3 | 1.06×10-3 | .874 |
P=10-4 | |||
.5, .1 | 0.85×10-4 | 0.38×10-4 | .050 |
.9, .1 | 0.61×10-4 | 0.92×10-4 | .662 |
Note.—Rejection rates under the null hypothesis at a biallelic candidate marker whose allele frequencies in subpopulations 1 and 2 are given by p1 and p2, respectively. We show estimated rejection rates at the .05, .01, 10−3 and 10 −4 significance levels for the STRAT, the TDT, and the standard χ2 test. The χ2 test is valid where p1=p2. Results are based on at least 50,000 replicates (P=.01, .05), 200,000 replicates (P=10-3), and 350,000 replicates (P=10-4).