Power of quantitative trait locus mapping for polygenic binary traits using generalized and regression interval mapping in multi-family half-sib designs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".