Table 3.
Arabidopsis thaliana data [7]: Method comparison for estimating the Δ Δ C q-value
| Estimate | se | t-value | df | p-value | LCL | UCL | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MT7 vs Tublin | |||||||
| EC | -4.374 | 0.4319 | -10.13 | 4 | 5.353·10−4 | -5.573 | -3.174 |
| EC&VA1 | -4.374 | 3.788 | -1.155 | 4 | 3.126·10−1 | -14.89 | 6.144 |
| MT7 vs UBQ | |||||||
| EC | -3.381 | 0.137 | -24.67 | 4 | 1.601·10−5 | -3.761 | -3 |
| EC&VA1 | -3.381 | 1.351 | -2.503 | 4 | 6.658·10−2 | -7.132 | 0.3699 |
EC efficiency corrected LMM estimate ignoring the uncertainty of the efficiency estimates. EC&VA1 EC and variance adjusted LMM estimate using the delta method. The last two columns show the 952000 lower and upper confidence interval limits