Table 6. Estimates of QTL positions and effects, and power analysis in the unlinked model based on 1000 simulation runs.
| QTL | Pos. (cM) (mean±SE) | A (mean±SE) | AE1 (mean±SE) | AE2 (mean±SE) | Power (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | 16.21±2.33 | 0.47±0.07 | 0.00±0.07 | 0.00±0.07 | 91.2 |
| Q2 | 2.83±2.01 | 0.00±0.06 | 0.47±0.06 | -0.47±0.06 | 98.3 |
| Q3 | 32.59±2.58 | 0.24±0.05 | -0.24±0.05 | 0.24±0.05 | 85.4 |
| Q4 | 26.16±2.62 | 0.24±0.06 | 0.24±0.05 | -0.24±0.05 | 80.7 |
| Q5 | 34.92±2.26 | 0.46±0.07 | 0.00±0.08 | 0.00±0.08 | 89.5 |
| FDR = 14.11% | |||||
A, AE1 and AE2 represent average additive effect, additive QEI effect in E1 and additive QEI effect in E2, respectively. Estimated positions and effects were calculated as the average of significant QTL in the support interval. Power of each QTL was calculated as the proportion of runs where the QTL was detected in the 10 cM support interval. FDR, false positive rate, was calculated as the proportion of false QTL to the total number of QTL detected. SE: standard error.