Table 3.
Model test | p-Value | ||
LNMXDK | POL vs. sporadic | 1.37 × 10-17c | |
EMF vs. POL | 0.008c | ||
MIT vs. EMF | 0.418 | ||
XFX vs. EMF | 0.500 | ||
final model:a | σ2g: 0.22(0.00b) + σ2ef: 0.32(0.00b) + σ2em: 0.42(0.00†) | ||
ttdt2 | POL vs. sporadic | 6.48 × 10-12c | |
EMF vs. POL | 0.000c | ||
MIT vs. EMF | 0.136 | ||
XFX vs. EMF | 0.217 | ||
final model:a | σ2g: 0.28(0.00b) + σ2ef: 0.70(0.00b)+σ2em: 0.40(0.00†) | ||
LNCIGP | POL vs. sporadic | 5.39 × 10-14c | |
EMF vs. POL | 0.059 | ||
MIT vs. POL | 0.037d | ||
XFX vs. MIT | 0.500 | ||
final model:a | σ2g: 17.55(9.24) + σ2e: 333.79(0.29) + σ2mt: 55.06(2.46) | ||
ecb21 | POL vs. sporadic | 7.34 × 10-35c | |
EMF vs. POL | 0.002b | ||
MIT vs. EMF | 0.012d | ||
XFX vs. MIT | 0.234 | ||
final model:a | σ2g: 10.76(0.21) + σ2ef: 17.22(0.07) + σ2em: 10.50(0.07) + σ2mt: 3.24(0.21) | ||
ttth1 | POL vs. sporadic | 6.25 × 10-11c | |
EMF vs. POL | 0.149 | ||
MIT vs. POL | 0.030d | ||
XFX vs. MIT | 0.500 | ||
final model:a | σ2g: 0.08(0.01) + σ2e: 0.28(0.00b) + σ2mt: 0.04(0.00b) | ||
ntth1 | POL vs. sporadic | 5.93 × 10-9c | |
EMF vs. POL | 0.010d | ||
MIT vs. EMF | 0.060 | ||
XFX vs. EMF | 0.021d | ||
final model:a | σ2g: 0.02(0.01) + σ2ef: 0.19(0.00b) + σ2em: 0.11(0.00b)+σ2Xf: 0.03(0.00b) |
aEstimates (SE) of parameters retained in the final model (the final estimate of h2g is given even when = 0). σ2g, autosomal additive genetic variance; σ2mt, additive genetic variance due to the mitochondrion; σ2Xf, X-linked additive genetic variance in females; σ2ef, random environmental variance in females; σ2em, random environmental variance in males.
bSEs reported as (0.00) are nonzero but <0.01.
cp < 0.01
dp < 0.05