denovo map- scantwo

[nata...@gmail.com]

Hi,

The scantwo() results of two LGs with interaction were as follows:

     Trait chr1 chr2 pos1f pos2f lod.full  pval  lod.fv1  pval  

1     Phe1  LG2 LG21    34    24 7.948200 0.246 6.592670 0.130 

2     Phe2  LG2 LG21    34    24 9.010371 0.262 7.528616 0.212 

  lod.int  pval pos1a pos2a  lod.add  pval   lod.av1  pval

6.1518923 0.088    30    40 1.796308 1.000 0.4407773 1.000

7.3046853 0.053    12    18 1.705686 1.000 0.2239308 1.000

Both LGs had no QTL evidence for any phenotype.

I wonder if this means that I should merge those LGs.

Should I?

Thanks a lot!

[Karl Broman]

Whether to merge linkage groups has to do with the associations among the genotypes at the markers, which is completely separate from what you learn from scantwo().

These scantwo results are saying that there look to be possible QTL on linkage groups 2 and 21 that show a potential epistatic interaction for these two phenotypes.

karl

[nata...@gmail.com]

thanks!

what is a good p. value for scantwo results?

ב-יום רביעי, 11 באוגוסט 2021 בשעה 23:47:25 UTC+3, ‪Karl Broman‬‏ כתב/ה:

[nata...@gmail.com]

Is there a connection between an interaction plot for a pair of loci to the two-qtl models (scantwo output)?

Both determine whether the pair is additive or epistatic.

ב-יום חמישי, 12 באוגוסט 2021 בשעה 17:13:08 UTC+3, nata...@gmail.com כתב/ה:

[Karl Broman]

See chapter 8 of the R/qtl book, https://rqtl.org/book

[nata...@gmail.com]

Ok thanks

What does the following scantwo output suggest (alpha = 0.5)? 

     Trait chr1 chr2 pos1f pos2f lod.full   pval  lod.fv1   pval   lod.int   pval

      phe3 LG19 LG20    34    32      8.8  0.051      6.1  0.281       3.9  0.995

 pos1a pos2a  lod.add   pval   lod.av1   pval

    34    32      4.9  0.338       2.1  0.700

Full, cond. interactive and additive models were significant.

I guess the additive is irrelevant as long as the cond. additive is not significant as well

thank you,

Nataly 

ב-יום חמישי, 12 באוגוסט 2021 בשעה 18:03:16 UTC+3, ‪Karl Broman‬‏ כתב/ה:

[Karl Broman]

I would conclude that there’s insufficient evidence for a second QTL, as p=0.28 is bot small. Looking for small p-values for both full and fv1, or for both add and av1.

karl

On Aug 17, 2021, at 4:27 AM, nata...@gmail.com wrote:



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R/qtl discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rqtl-disc+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rqtl-disc/5eb5fa24-2e71-4fc5-9f83-a02f246774d3n%40googlegroups.com.

[nata...@gmail.com]

Thanks a lot!

ב-יום רביעי, 18 באוגוסט 2021 בשעה 18:40:49 UTC+3, ‪Karl Broman‬‏ כתב/ה: