MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126457991 · doi:10.1017/s001667230000481x

Power of quantitative trait locus mapping for polygenic binary traits using generalized and regression interval mapping in multi-family half-sib designs

2000· article· en· W2126457991 on OpenAlexafffund
Haja N. Kadarmideen, Luc Janss, Jack C. M. Dekkers

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaIowa State University
KeywordsQuantitative trait locusHeritabilityStatisticsInclusive composite interval mappingBinary numberBinary dataMathematicsTraitBiologyGeneticsGene mappingComputer scienceChromosome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A generalized interval mapping (GIM) method to map quantitative trait loci (QTL) for binary polygenic traits in a multi-family half-sib design is developed based on threshold theory and implemented using a Newton-Raphson algorithm. Statistical power and bias of QTL mapping for binary traits by GIM is compared with linear regression interval mapping (RIM) using simulation. Data on 20 paternal half-sib families were simulated with two genetic markers that bracketed an additive QTL. Data simulated and analysed were: (1) data on the underlying normally distributed liability (NDL) scale, (2) binary data created by truncating NDL data based on three thresholds yielding data sets with three different incidences, and (3) NDL data with polygenic and QTL effects reduced by a proportion equal to the ratio of the heritabilities on the binary versus NDL scale (reduced-NDL). Binary data were simulated with and without systematic environmental (herd) effects in an unbalanced design. GIM and RIM gave similar power to detect the QTL and similar estimates of QTL location, effects and variances. Presence of fixed effects caused differences in bias between RIM and GIM, where GIM showed smaller bias which was affected less by incidence. The original NDL data had higher power and lower bias in QTL parameter estimates than binary and reduced-NDL data. RIM for reduced-NDL and binary data gave similar power and estimates of QTL parameters, indicating that the impact of the binary nature of data on QTL analysis is equivalent to its impact on heritability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.233
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.165 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenetics ResearchSame topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsFrench-language works237,207