Skip to main content
. 2003 Jan 16;4(1):30–39. doi: 10.1038/sj.gene.6363895

Table 3.

Genetic effects on T cell subset proportions in virgin male and female mice

Effect size
Trait Age a Marker b IM position c IM sigd (%) P(F)<e P(e)<f Allele effect % Pointsg S.E. h
CD4 8 D3Mit25 +0 10 0.0002 0.02 C>B6 3.6 0.9
CD4 8 D3Mit73 +9 5 C>B6
CD4 8 D8Mit51 +1 5 0.0001 0.01 C>B6 3.7 0.9
CD4 8 D9Mit104 −3 5 0.0003 0.02 C3>D2 3.4 0.9
CD4 8 D15Mit100 ND 0.0014 0.09 D2>C3 2.8 0.9
CD4 18 D12Mit105 ND 0.0011 0.09 C>B6 4.3 1.3
CD4 18 D13Mit57 ND 0.0009 0.07 D2>C3 4.4 1.3
CD4P 8 D16Mit5 ND 0.0011 0.08 C>B6 5.0 1.5
CD4V 8 D4Mit155 ND 0.0009 0.07 D2>C3 5.0 1.5
CD4V 8 D9Mit12 −4 5 C>B6
CD8 8 D8Mit190 ND 0.0006 0.04 B6>C 3.3 1.0
CD8 8 D15Mit100 ND 0.0003 0.02 C3>D2 3.5 1.0
CD8 8 D19Mit10 ND 0.0004 0.03 C3>D2 3.5 1.0
CD8M 8 D1Mit206 +7 5 0.0005 0.05 D2>C3 5.4 1.5
CD8M 8 D11Mit168 −1 10 0.0005 0.05 D2>C3 5.3 1.5
CD8M 8 D12Mit105 +0 5 0.0004 0.04 B6>C 5.7 1.6
CD8M 18 D1Mit221 −8 5 D2>C3
CD8M 18 D2Mit58 ND 0.0007 0.06 B6>C 7.9 2.3
CD8M 18 D12Mit105 +0 5 0.0001 0.02 B6>C 8.5 2.2

aAge (8 or 18 months) at which association was noted.

bGenotypic markers with strongest association. Markers where P(e)<0.10 in the ANOVA calculations are shown in this table, supplemented by three QTL that were detected as significant only by using the interval mapping approach. Number of mice used for each calculation varied between 143 and 242.

cPosition of QTL estimated by interval mapping, stated in cM with respect to the indicated marker; a negative sign indicates an estimate closer to the centromere and a positive sign indicates a location further from the centromere. ND = not detected by the interval method.

d-hAs in Table 2.