ライフサイエンスコーパス: segregation ratio

1 lleles that cause sex-specific biases in the segregation ratio.

2 is reflected by the departure from Mendelian segregation ratio.

3 DNA fragment (electrophoretic band) from its segregation ratio.

4 xpression but do not show a simple Mendelian segregation ratio.

5 ait will deviate from the expected Mendelian segregation ratio.

6 rosses, multiple mechanisms act to influence segregation ratios.

7 some molecular markers often show distorted segregation ratios.

8 ii F2 population were surveyed for distorted segregation ratios.

9 d the process of fertilization explained his segregation ratios.

10 In addition, the grand pooled segregation ratio, 127:243:54, deviates significantly fr

11 ' is shown not to result in the expected 3:1 segregation ratio, and about half of the traits he inves

12 Unlinked modifiers that alter the segregation ratio are unable to invade such a population

13 that causes sex-specific modification of the segregation ratio at the primary locus.

14 Differences in segregation ratios between males indicate differences be

15 set of polymorphic alleles that show simplex segregation ratios can be used to locate QTLs.

16 a single clone, random spore analysis gave a segregation ratio close to 1:1 for DDP resistance and se

17 yos developed normally and exhibited a 1:2:1 segregation ratio for palmitate accumulation.

18 Segregation ratios for 11 of 14 loci are significantly h

19 Maximum likelihood tests based on distorted segregation ratios for single markers and for interval m

20 ssociated heterosis and distortion of marker segregation ratios, have been widely reported over the p

21 In subsequent generations, the segregation ratio in these families stabilized at approx

22 from massive distortions of zygotic, marker segregation ratios in F(2) families.

23 Segregation ratios in males were best explained by a mix

24 oportion of the markers exhibited unexpected segregation ratios in the light of their configurations

25 massive distortions of microsatellite-marker segregation ratios in two F(2) hybrid families, but we n

26 Markers with distorted segregation ratios occurred in blocks in both linkage ma

27 rn is apparently autosomally dominant with a segregation ratio of 40.1% for kindred members aged 50 y

28 Distorted segregation ratios of genetic markers are often observed

29 Distorted segregation ratios of markers on linkage group (LG) 5 we

30 al crossbreeding experiments, we compare the segregation ratios of microsatellite DNA markers at 6 hr

31 Segregation ratios of the progeny of BC3 plants, when cr

32 r picture was provided by examination of the segregation ratios of two marker genes among the F3 prog

33 For the first time, we track segregation ratios of vQTL-linked markers through the li

34 The segregation ratios of wild-type to mutant phenotypes in

35 Altered segregation ratios on near-isogenic host genotypes diffe

36 ansgenic plants (R1) established a phenotype segregation ratio showing a non-Mendelian inheritance pa

37 The 15:1 F2 segregation ratio suggested that two recessive genes wer

38 ns at metaphase I, and in turn alter allelic segregation ratios through double reduction.

39 some viability loci that cause the observed segregation ratios to deviate from Mendelian expectation

40 us positions and effects were estimated from segregation ratios using a maximum-likelihood interval m

41 linkage map combining markers with different segregation ratios was assembled for this full-sib famil

42 Extreme distortion of marker segregation ratios was observed in populations in which

43 Region(s) with skewed segregation ratios were detected on chromosomes 1D, 3D,

44 Markers with distorted segregation ratios were unique to each population with b