Which option is better for variance component estimation in TASSEL?
Hello everyone!
There are two options in TASSEL for variance component estimation while running a mixed linear model (MLM) for association mapping. First one is to use P3D compression, second is to re-estimate variance after each marker.
TASSEL help window claims that the compression saves time and overall model fit. Furthermore, it is said that for small and moderate-sized data sets any of the methods should give reasonable performance. If you are you are well versed in this topic please help to understand the idea and how to choose appropriate option.
0 answers
No answers yet.
Log in to answer this question.
More posts like this
-
Linear Mixed-Effects Model Coefficient Interpretation
written by BioNovice247 •
-
Plot GWAS p value distribution for multiple traits
written by waqaskhokhar999
-
Applying linear mixed model for RNA-Seq data
written by Assa Yeroslaviz
-
How to interpret Centred IBS kinship matrix produced by TASSEL?
written by rimgubaev
-
Is it ok to use genotype replicates for association studies?
written by rimgubaev
-
Has anyone dealt with "Specified element is out of bounds" error produced by TASSEL?
written by rimgubaev
-
News: Introduction to Mixed (Hierarchical) models for biologists using R (IMBR01)
written by oliverhooker
-
R Script For Mixed Linear Model (Mlm) To Do Association Mapping
written by mshehabu •
-
Linear Regression: How To Detect Significant Trends In Variability
written by gbayon
-
Association Mapping And Fdr (False Discovery Rate) Test?
written by Aabha •
