Table 6.

Regression analysis of the interaction between a chromosome 3 locus (epiEG3.1, corresponding to marker rs13477017) and a chromosome 6 locus (epiEG6.1, corresponding to marker gnf06.032.524) affecting growth (weight gain) from week 1 to week 2

Effect	Estimate	SE	LPR	%
aA	−0.013	0.027	0.20	–
dA	0.046	0.034	0.76	–
iA	−0.009	0.027	0.13	–
aB	−0.006	0.029	0.08	–
dB	−0.002	0.036	0.02	–
iB	0.017	0.029	0.25	–
aa	−0.097	0.034	2.35	0.50
ad	−0.040	0.047	0.41	–
ai	−0.022	0.035	0.27	–
da	0.101	0.047	1.52	0.27
dd	0.039	0.064	0.27	–
di	0.153	0.046	3.10	0.62
ia	−0.021	0.036	0.26	–
id	−0.028	0.048	0.25	–
ii	0.148	0.034	4.81	1.16

The 15 genetic-effect estimates were fitted using the regression model shown in Eq. 12 and the genotypic index scores shown in Table 1. The single-locus effects with the subscript A correspond to the effects of epiEG3.1 while those with the subscript B correspond to the locus epiEG6.1. Together, the significance test of the epistatic interaction has an LPR of 5.54. The combined effects of the locus explain 2.8% of the phenotypic variance (2.5% for significant effects). An LPR value of 1.3 corresponds to a p value of 0.05. Significant effects are highlighted in boldface. Other details are given in Table 5