Table 3. QTLs detected for resistance to downy mildew in the Grand Rapids × Iceberg population^a.

QTL	Experiment	Disease assessment	Week of assessment	LODc	R2%d	gg genotypee Mean ± S.E.	ii genotypef Mean ± S.E.
qDM2.1	F-2009	Rating	3	4.8	22	2.60 ± 0.13	1.64 ± 0.15
		Rating	5	3.2	15	2.65 ± 0.12	2.06 ± 0.09
		AUDPSb	3	4.1	19	68.33 ± 3.16	48.48 ± 3.19
		AUDPS	5	4.5	20	86.91 ± 3.67	62.90 ± 3.65
	F-2011	Rating	2	3.5	16	1.96 ± 0.07	1.53 ± 0.07
		AUDPS	2	3.0	14	20.63 ± 0.95	15.86 ± 0.72
		AUDPS	5	2.8	13	97.85 ± 4.53	75.28 ± 4.18
	F-2012b	AUDPS	3	3.0	12	21.52 ± 0.87	16.81 ± 0.81
	L-2012a	Sporulation	1	3.2	15	0.31 ± 0.07	0.02 ± 0.03
	Integrated	0 – 100	n.a.	4.5	21	56.85 ± 3.48	33.84 ± 2.83
qDM5.1	F-2008	Rating	1	2.8	13	1.69 ± 0.15	0.90 ± 0.12
	F-2011	Rating	1	3.7	17	1.08 ± 0.06	0.68 ± 0.06
		Rating	2	4.4	20	2.01 ± 0.07	1.52 ± 0.07
		Rating	5	3.1	14	2.50 ± 0.13	1.81 ± 0.13
		AUDPS	2	4.6	21	21.64 ± 0.83	15.43 ± 0.83
		AUDPS	5	3.6	17	102.16 ± 4.14	73.77 ± 4.40
	L-2012b	Sporulation	1	2.9	14	0.51 ± 0.07	0.14 ± 0.05
	Integrated	0 – 100	n.a	3.4	16	56.82 ± 3.44	38.41 ± 3.31

^aNo significant QTLs were detected from F-2009 rating in week 1, F-2012a rating, and F-2012b ratings in weeks 1, 2, 3 and AUDPS in week 2.

^bAUDPS - the area under the disease progress steps is calculated from individual ratings and combines disease progress from the first evaluation until the current evaluation⁴⁶. This value is always larger than sum of individual ratings.

^cLOD – Logarithm of the odds score for QTLs calculated by simple interval mapping.

^dR²% - Percentage of the total phenotypic variation of the trait explained by the QTL.

^eMean value and standard error for RILs homozygous for Grand Rapids allele at the QTL.

^fMean value and standard error for RILs homozygous for Iceberg allele at the QTL.