Table 1.
Hardy–Weinberg and IA analysis for each population
| Population | n(ET) | Probability of
agreement with Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium
|
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
MS42
|
292
|
CRAM
|
IA
|
||||||
| All | ETs | All | ETs | All | ETs | All | ETs | ||
| Zambia, HSR | 19 (6) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.64 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 1.447 | −0.489 |
| Uganda, HSR | 23 (2) | 0.00 | NA | 1.00 | NA | 0.00 | NA | 1.539 | NA |
| Uganda, HSS | 41 (13) | 0.04 | 0.55 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.29 | 1.129 | −0.229 |
| Uganda, total | 64 (15) | 0.00 | 0.31 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.36 | 1.340 | −0.548 |
For this analysis nine of 10 isolates that had not been tested for human serum resistance were included in the HSS group based on genotype analysis. The remaining isolate was included in the HSR group as it contained the HSR genotype (M5). n, Number of isolates; NA, not applicable. Bold figures indicate agreement with Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium, i.e., probability of >0.05 or negative values of IA.