Summary
The effect of sample size on estimating the number of genes by the inbred-backcross and genotype assay procedures was investigated. Modifications were proposed for each procedure. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals for estimated numbers of genes and the minimum sample size required to discriminate between various genetic hypotheses were calculated for both procedures. Sample size had a greater impact on the estimation of gene number by the genotype assay procedure than by the inbred-backcross procedure, especially for small sample sizes. For the inbred-backcross procedure, the optimal number of backcrosses varied with the number of genes. Estimates of the number of genes are theoretically less reliable when estimated by the genotype assay procedure than by the inbred-backcross procedure, and are sensitive to the choice of assay generation. Generally, the inbredbackcross procedure is preferred. Even with the fulfillment of all genetic assumptions for each method and absence of error in measuring genotypic values, substantial upward or downward biases in the estimates of the number of genes are expected from both the inbred-backcross and the genotype assay procedures.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Burton GW (1951) Quantitative inheritance in pearl millet. Agron J 43:407–417
Castle WE (1921) An improved method of estimating the number of genetic factors concerned in case of blending inheritance. Science 54:223
Choo TM, Reinbergs E (1982) Estimation of the number of genes in doubled haploid populations of barley (Hordeum vulgare). Can J Genet Cytol 24:337–341
Jinks JL, Towey P (1976) Estimating the number of genes in a polygenic system by genotype assay. Heredity 37:69–81
Mather K (1949) Biometrical genetics. Methuen, London
Mather K (1951) The measurement of linkage in heredity. John Wiley and Sons, New York
Powers LR (1963) The partitioning method of genetic analysis and some aspects of its application to plant breeding. In: Hanson WD, Robinson HF (eds) Statistical genetics and plant breeding, No 982. NAS-NRC, Washington DC, pp 280–318
Powers LR, Locke LF, Garrett JC (1950) Partitioning method of genetic analysis applied to quantitative characters of tomato crosses. USDA Techn Bull 998
Tan WY, Chang WC (1972) Convolution approach to the genetic analysis of quantitative characters of self-fertilized populations. Biometrics 28:1073–1090
Towey P, Jinks JL (1977) Alternative ways of estimating the number of genes in a polygenic system by genotype assay. Heredity 39:399–410
Weber E (1959) The genetical analysis of characters with continuous variability on a Mendelian basis. 1. Mono-hybrid segregation. Genetics 44:1131–1139
Wehrhahn C, Alard RW (1965) The detection and measurement of the effects of individual genes involved in the inheritance of a quantitative character in wheat. Genetics 51:109–119
Wright S (1968) Evolution and the genetics of populations. Vol I. Genetic and biometric foundations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago Ill, pp 381–403
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Communicated by A. L. Kahler
Part of this study is based on the Ph.D. thesis of the senior author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mulitze, D.K., Baker, R.J. Evaluation of biometrical methods for estimating the number of genes. Theoret. Appl. Genetics 69, 553–558 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00251103
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00251103