You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hello everyone,
According to the original paper of FarmCPU, pseudo-QTNs are initially either left empty, or can be defined (markers in your data that are associated with candidate genes). I wonder if there is such option in the package (Is it the CV.FarmCPU argument ?), like to define a list of "pseudo-QTNs" to be used initially, instead of running a "blind" analysis. A comparison between the two methods would be interesting.
Thank you
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hello everyone,
According to the original paper of FarmCPU, pseudo-QTNs are initially either left empty, or can be defined (markers in your data that are associated with candidate genes). I wonder if there is such option in the package (Is it the CV.FarmCPU argument ?), like to define a list of "pseudo-QTNs" to be used initially, instead of running a "blind" analysis. A comparison between the two methods would be interesting.
Thank you
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: