Skip to main content
. 2008 Oct 30;25(8):1033–1039. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn558

Table 3.

Mean estimates and SDs (in parentheses) of QTL effects detected by various mapping methods

Sample size Distribution QTL no.
1 2 3 4 5 6
150 True Effect 0.45 0.70 0.30 0.55 0.30 0.20
t 0.50 (0.09) 0.73 (0.10) 0.35 (0.06) 0.57 (0.14) 0.25 (0.09) 0.23 (0.10)
Slash 0.51 (0.10) 0.77 (0.13) 0.38 (0.04) 0.54 (0.09) 0.23 (0.10) 0.27 (0.13)
Contaminated 0.51 (0.12) 0.76 (0.14) 0.39 (0.17) 0.62 (0.10) 0.37 (0.12) 0.26 (0.14)
Normal 0.56 (0.20) 0.74 (0.22) 0.46 (0.29) 0.63 (0.14) 0.39 (0.20) 0.31 (–)
Non-Bayesian 0.81 (0.52) 1.04 (0.44) 0.87 (0.43) 0.68 (0.48)
300 t 0.46 (0.07) 0.70 (0.08) 0.33 (0.13) 0.57 (0.08) 0.26 (0.07) 0.23 (0.08)
Slash 0.45 (0.09) 0.72 (0.09) 0.35 (0.07) 0.56 (0.08) 0.25 (0.09) 0.25 (0.09)
Contaminated 0.45 (0.09) 0.70 (0.12) 0.39 (0.18) 0.60 (0.14) 0.35 (0.09) 0.25 (0.12)
Normal 0.52 (0.19) 0.72 (0.14) 0.41 (0.28) 0.61 (0.18) 0.36 (0.18) 0.28 (0.17)
Non-Bayesian 0.78 (0.41) 0.89 (0.30) 0.58 (0.38) 0.83 (0.35) 0.64 (0.42) 0.51 (0.29)