Table 2. LD decay estimated in IOI.
| Hill-Weir | Sved | |||||||||
| Average rf | Min rf | Average rf | Min rf | |||||||
| r 2 | Map distance (cM) | N e ± SE | Map distance (cM) | N e ± SE | Map distance (cM) | N e ± SE | Map distance (cM) | N e ± SE | ||
| r 2 | 21.5 | 9±0.1 | 19.5 | 10±0.1 | 13.6 | 17±0.1 | 12.3 | 18±0.1 | ||
| rs 2 k0 | 14.2 | 14±0.1 | 12.7 | 15±0.2 | 9.9 | 23±0.2 | 8.9 | 25±0.2 | ||
| rs 2 k10 | 14.4 | 13±0.1 | 12.9 | 15±0.2 | 10 | 22±0.2 | 9 | 25±0.2 | ||
| rs 2 k50 | 14.5 | 13±0.1 | 13 | 15±0.2 | 10.1 | 22±0.2 | 9.1 | 25±0.2 | ||
| rsv 2 k0 | 2.6 | 75±0.8 | 2.2 | 87±1 | 2.3 | 99±1.5 | 2 | 111±2 | ||
| rsv 2 k10 | 2.6 | 73±0.8 | 2.3 | 85±1 | 2.3 | 97±1.5 | 2.1 | 109±1.9 | ||
| rsv 2 k50 | 2.6 | 73±0.8 | 2.3 | 84±1 | 2.3 | 96±1.5 | 2.1 | 108±1.9 | ||
| rv 2 | 2.8 | 68±0.7 | 2.5 | 79±0.9 | 2.5 | 91±1.3 | 2.2 | 102±1.7 | ||
The relationship between LD and map distance was modeled by fitting two alternate non-linear regression models: a drift-recombination equilibrium model [36] or a modified recombination-drift model including low level of mutation and an adjustment for sample size [37]. Map distance at r2 = 0.1 was shown. Both average distance across six bi-parental mapping population and minimum distance from available mapping populations were used. Ne, effective population size; SE, standard error.