Re: Units of IBD
- From: "Jim McGinn" <jimmcginn@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 21:18:19 -0400 (EDT)
Perplexed in Peoria wrote:
> Jim McGinn wrote:
>
> > IBD does have units. Use them.
<snip>
> I'm going to venture a guess. Let me know if I guess correctly.
> The "units" that you have in mind are "IBD-alleles-at-the-locus
> over all-alleles-at-the-locus".
Good. So you are cognizant of the units/dimensions.
And all that subterfuge you presented earlier is, well,
subterfuge. IBD (identical by descent) indicates the
number of genes (in this instance I'm using the term
gene to indicate alleles at locuses [which is really
the only rationally consistent usage of gene]) that
have been copied through osmosis from a specific
individual *and* that are identical (not either
variations or mutations). It does *not* indicate the
number of genes that are identical.
Now see if you can do one of the following:
1) Explain why Hamilton assumed genes IBD of two
individuals represents the relatedness (R) of these
two individuals.
2) Explain Hamilton's rule using only the term "genes
IBD" in place of R (relatedness).
If you can do either of these I will send you a check
for $10,000.
> That is the only sense I can
> make out of your claim that all probabilities have units.
Gee, this time it only took you about a week and a
half to answer the question honestly.
<snip>
Jim
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Units of IBD
- From: Tim Tyler
- Re: Units of IBD
- From: Perplexed in Peoria
- Re: Units of IBD
- Prev by Date: Re: Underestimating 'r'
- Next by Date: Re: NS and AaD curves
- Previous by thread: Re: Units of IBD
- Next by thread: Re: Units of IBD
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
