戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 nd multipoint analysis (using complex-valued recombination fractions).
2 stimation of gamete mode frequencies and the recombination fraction.
3 nize and correct erroneous joins at peaks in recombination fraction.
4 onditional allele frequencies on disease and recombination fraction.
5 or each marker were highly negative at small recombination fractions.
6 licit form, expressed in terms of interlocus recombination fractions.
7               A maximum LOD score of 3.16 at recombination fraction 0 was obtained for five markers m
8 er-onset families, with a LOD score of 3.02 (recombination fraction 0) at marker ATA34E08.
9 revealed a maximum LOD score (Zmax) of 8.13 (recombination fraction 0) for marker D1S2836; multipoint
10 1.2-p11.4, with a maximum LOD score of 3.21 (recombination fraction 0) for markers between DXS1039 an
11  resulted in a maximum LOD score of 7.83 (at recombination fraction 0) for markers D1S2848-D1S191.
12  evidence of linkage (maximum LOD score 3.8, recombination fraction 0) of an important FCH phenotype,
13                  A maximum LOD score of 4.3 (recombination fraction 0) was obtained for D22S928 and D
14 mosome 2q (maximum two-point LOD score 4.77; recombination fraction 0).
15 me 17p, with a LOD score of 4.98 at D17S740 (recombination fraction 0).
16 ted in the 4q27-31 region (LOD score 3.10 at recombination fraction 0).
17 t marker DXS1047 (maximum LOD score = 3.1 at recombination fraction 0).
18 some 8q (maximum two-point LOD score 5.51 at recombination fraction 0).
19 n only the affected individuals was 2.21, at recombination fraction 0, at marker D7S2195 on chromosom
20 linkage, with a maximum LOD score of 4.81 at recombination fraction 0, between the BO phenotype and p
21       A maximum two-point LOD score of 3.66 (recombination fraction = 0.00, penetrance = 0.80) was ob
22 th a maximum LOD score >1.5 (1.94 at D8S373: recombination fraction.001).
23 th a maximum two-point LOD score of 6.82, at recombination fraction.041, for D12S1030.
24  itself, markedly affect the estimate of the recombination fraction; (2) the power of the analysis, r
25                    The use of complex-valued recombination fractions also allows the stochastic equiv
26 ethod was used to estimate the parameters of recombination fractions and effects of sterile genes, an
27 ng the IBLs were used to calculate two-point recombination fractions and LOD scores through grid sear
28 segregation, clustering SNPs, calculation of recombination fractions and LOD scores, ordering of SNPs
29 t the linkage of the markers (as measured by recombination fraction) and the degree of their linkage
30 ing the frequencies of double reduction, the recombination fraction, and optimal parental linkage pha
31 ci, the frequency of the disease allele, the recombination fraction, and the methods for mapping the
32 recise estimates for the allele frequencies, recombination fractions, and linkage disequilibria betwe
33  frequencies (i.e., LD between marker loci), recombination fractions, and locus order-are dealt with
34  was because it depends upon the rankings of recombination fractions at individual markers, and is su
35 traight theta+straightepsiloni; theta is the recombination fraction between actual ("real") genotypes
36 ut threefold more information for estimating recombination fraction between closely linked markers th
37  we proposed a new method for estimating the recombination fraction between markers, which greatly im
38 ompute a maximum likelihood estimator of the recombination fraction between pairs of markers.
39  model depends on only three parameters, the recombination fraction between the disease locus and an
40  suppressors is a decreasing function of the recombination fraction between the drive and suppressor
41 he frequency of sexual reproduction, and the recombination fraction between the genetic marker and th
42  will be significantly greater than the true recombination fraction between the linked disease-defini
43 ded, the retardation being determined by the recombination fraction between the neutral and selected
44 istance between two loci from the observable recombination fraction between them.
45 n of the double reduction frequencies of and recombination fraction between two markers.
46  outperformed the EM algorithm in estimating recombination fractions between dominant loci and recove
47  key for doing so is to efficiently estimate recombination fractions between dominant markers in repu
48 pair of markers complicate the estimation of recombination fractions between markers and consequently
49 ressively joins linkage groups at increasing recombination fractions between terminal markers, and at
50  models and 3 two-locus models), and varying recombination fractions between the marker and the trait
51 ve, 27 different genetic models, and varying recombination fractions between the marker and the trait
52 alysis permits more accurate estimate of the recombination fraction but may be of limited use in dist
53 phenotypic probabilities as functions of the recombination fraction, calculation of theoretical stand
54                             As a result, the recombination fraction can be overestimated in two-point
55  these errors can be absorbed in an inflated recombination-fraction estimate, leaving the test statis
56 ed F2 dominant marker data indicate that the recombination fractions estimated by the new method cont
57 ombination makes it difficult to predict the recombination fraction for an interval in any particular
58 ire genome was constructed by estimating the recombination fraction for each pair of adjacent inserts
59  11 kb region using a new method to estimate recombination fractions from single-sperm typing data.
60 of the test by simulating markers at various recombination fractions from the disease locus.
61 nsion of this model to "hypercomplex-valued" recombination fractions (hereafter referred to as "hyper
62                           Thus, the observed recombination fraction in any IRI population can be expr
63 ng assumptions, for determining the expected recombination fraction in IRI populations from the cross
64 e ability of hosts to actively distort their recombination fraction in rapid response to environmenta
65 OD scores and more-accurate estimates of the recombination fraction in the families showing linkage.
66             We also incorporate sex-specific recombination fractions into this model.
67           To this end, the definition of the recombination fraction is extended to the complex plane,
68 ed for the crossover rate per meiosis if the recombination fraction is known for the IRI population.
69 ions (hereafter referred to as "hypercomplex recombination fractions") is presented, to handle random
70   The adh1 and adh2 loci are tightly linked (recombination fraction <0.01) while the adh3 locus is in
71               A maximum LOD score of 3.98 at recombination fraction of .00 was achieved for the marke
72   In addition, a peak LOD score of 2.50 at a recombination fraction of .00 was obtained for the MCD t
73 score (Z) was obtained with D9S1847 (Z=18.8, recombination fraction of .00).
74 um LOD score was 5.00, with marker D18S1099 (recombination fraction of .001).
75 kage analysis in this pedigree was 3.85 at a recombination fraction of .0010, for markers D12S1706 an
76 OD score was 9.59, with marker D18S481, at a recombination fraction of .0010.
77  combined two-point LOD score was 15.76 at a recombination fraction of .021, with the polymorphic mar
78 m LOD score of 9.01 for marker D17S1357 at a recombination fraction of .03.
79  pedigree (a maximum LOD score of 12.94 at a recombination fraction of 0 for D5S393) and combined gen
80 um combined two-point LOD score of 3.04 at a recombination fraction of 0 for the marker at locus D18S
81               A peak LOD score of 11.63 at a recombination fraction of 0 was obtained with marker D6S
82 wed a maximum two-point LOD score of 3.61 at recombination fraction of 0 with marker D4S428.
83          The combined LOD score is 4.21 at a recombination fraction of 0, and the locus spans an inte
84 e highest combined LOD-score value, 8.1 at a recombination fraction of 0, with marker D1S2799.
85  a maximum two-point lod score of 3.496 at a recombination fraction of 0.
86 tained for markers DXS8054 and DXS1003, at a recombination fraction of 0.
87 3.92 was obtained with marker D10S1664, at a recombination fraction of 0.
88 ich yielded a maximum LOD score of 4.71 at a recombination fraction of 0.
89                     A LOD score of 5.08 at a recombination fraction of 0.0 was obtained for the marke
90 scores of -7.68 and 6.08, respectively, at a recombination fraction of 0.0.
91 fied with a two-point lod score of 6.09 at a recombination fraction of 0.00.
92 16S3041 with a maximum lod score of 8.1 at a recombination fraction of 0.04 for marker D16S3017.
93 A logarithm of odds (LOD) score of 0.92 at a recombination fraction of 0.05 was observed for insulin
94 e influence of the BRCA2 locus, located at a recombination fraction of 0.25 from the new locus.
95 mum logarithm of odds (LOD) of 8 and maximum recombination fraction of 0.35.
96 a minimum logarithm of odds of 6 and maximum recombination fraction of 0.40.
97                                            A recombination fraction of approximately 0.9% was calcula
98   Although a maximum LOD score of 10.00 at a recombination fraction of straight theta=.00 was obtaine
99 rs, D10S191 and D10S1653, respectively, at a recombination fraction of straight theta=.00.
100  a maximum two-point LOD score of 4.166 at a recombination fraction of theta = 0.
101 ise logarithm of the odds score of 4.73 at a recombination fraction of theta at D7S684 was obtained w
102   A maximum two-point lod score of 7.23 at a recombination fraction of zero was obtained for marker D
103 Mit103 with a maximum LOD score of 25.9 at a recombination fraction of zero.
104 me 4p, with a maximum LOD score of 5.12 at a recombination fraction of.00, for marker D4S403.
105 s strong, kappa c becomes independent on the recombination fraction r between the two loci.
106   Furthermore, this result holds even if the recombination fraction R is the only parameter of intere
107  statistically significant difference in the recombination fraction (range 5.1%-11.2%) was detected a
108 osome 15 (maximum two-point LOD score, 5.83; recombination fraction [straight theta] 0 at locus D15S2
109  to D4S426 (maximum LOD score [Z(max)] 4.81; recombination fraction [straight theta] 0), D4S2688 (Zma
110 ficantly higher LOD scores and more-accurate recombination fractions than did analysis that did not a
111 smaller variances in estimation of two-point recombination fractions than the EM algorithm.
112  with the microsatellite marker D16S522 at a recombination fraction theta = 0 provides evidence suppo
113  the maximum two-point lod scores of 2.18 at recombination fraction theta = 0 was obtained with marke
114 to marker C29.002 on canine chromosome 29 at recombination fraction theta = 0.0 with a maximum LOD sc
115 LOD score in these 12 families was 3.22 at a recombination fraction (theta) of .06, with marker D1S50
116 e for linkage (LOD score 2.5), but at a high recombination fraction (theta), suggesting heterogeneity
117 ned under the recessive-broad model: 3.92 at recombination fraction (theta).1 with D13S793, under hom
118 ; maximum LOD score [Z(max)] 4.99 at maximum recombination fraction [theta(max)] .00), identifying FD
119 9q and a maximum combined LOD score of 26.2 (recombination fraction [theta] .025) with marker D9S927.
120 d at markers D22S1167 (LOD score [Z] 2.09 at recombination fraction [theta] 0) and D22S1154 (Z=1.39 a
121 9q, using linkage analysis (LOD score 3.5 at recombination fraction [theta] 0, for marker D9S938).
122 (STR) markers D20S847 (LOD score [Z] 5.50 at recombination fraction [theta] 0.0) and D20S195 (Z=3.65
123 8 (DXS1108; maximum LOD score [Zmax] = 4.34, recombination fraction [theta] = 0).
124 lowing markers: GATA172D05 (LOD score 3.164; recombination fraction [theta] = 0.156), DXS1047 (LOD sc
125 wo-point LOD score of 5.49 (marker D9S171 at recombination fraction [theta].05).
126  maximum LOD score Zmax of 7.82 at a maximum recombination fraction (thetamax) of .06 was found with
127 escribed a "complex-valued" extension of the recombination fraction to accommodate errors in the assi
128  although LOD scores were positive at higher recombination fractions, which is consistent with the pr
129  (homogeneous) trait, although the estimated recombination fraction will be significantly greater tha
130  to Xiphophorus linkage group V and exhibits recombination fractions with ES1 and MDH2 allozyme marke
131 zygotic twins (lambda M) and in terms of the recombination fraction, with the assumption of no residu

 
Page Top