. 2005 Jan;169(1):243–257. doi: 10.1534/genetics.104.032870

TABLE 3.

Summary of variation in transcript abundance

Gene	RPL32 abundance as predictor (r²)^a	Range of residuals (CTs)	≈ Transcript fold difference^b	d.f.	F-ratio^c
Acp26Aa	0.82***	−2.9–2.3	37^d	96,242	5.3***
CG8137	0.71***	−1.7–2.4	13.3	95,227	6.5***
Acp29AB	0.67***	−1.0–1.5	5.2	94,187	3.4***
CG31872	0.80***	−1.6–1.5	7.9	96,243	8.9***
Acp32CD	0.73***	−1.5–1.3	4.4	96,263	7.4***
Acp33A	0.79***	−2.0–1.5	10.7	96,237	5.3***
CG17331	0.85***	−1.1–1.0	2.8	96,251	2.5***
Acp36DE	0.76***	−2.1–1.2	6.5	96,249	7.4***
Acp53Ea	0.83***	−1.3–1.5	7.0	96,254	4.9***
PEBII	0.57***	−5.9–2.8	349^e	96,262	2.8***

^{^a}

*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P ≤ 0.001 based on simple linear regression (see text).

^{^b}

Transcript fold difference calculated as: difference = (1 + PCR efficiency)^{(largest residual CT−smallest residual CT)}.

^{^c}

*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P ≤ 0.001 based on ANOVA test for heterogeneity among lines (see text).

^{^d}

Excluding outlier results in a 14-fold difference.

^{^e}

Excluding outlier results in a 33-fold difference. This outlier was not the same line as the outlier in Acp26Aa.