(pasted from Centimorgan page during merge Dr d12 17:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC) )Reply
(pasted from Centimorgan page during merge Dr d12 17:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC) )
This doesn't sound right to me. If two genes are 50 cM apart, the probability that they are exchanged is the sum of the odd numbered points in a Poisson density with λ=0.5, which is 0.316. -phma 02:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
I get a different result using Excel. In cell C1 I put 0 (the chance a single gene will unlink from itself). Then I used the formula =(C1*0.99)+(1-C1)*0.01 to determine the chance that a gene 1 cM away will unlink ((the chance it was unlinked) * 0.99 + (the chance it was linked) * 0.01). Then I copied the formula 49 more times and in cell C51 I got the result 0.31791516. I don't know that much about statistics, but the discrepance could be because either:
I'd be happy to be corrected. --Djfeldman 17:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
"The size of the canine genome was initially estimated from maximum likelihood predictions to be 27 morgans in genetic distance." PLoS Genetics 1(5), 2005. No shortage of other examples...
"A 50 cM distance means that the genes will reassort 50% of the time, which makes them unlinked. "
This is incorrect. Two genes located 1 cM apart will by definition result in an observed recombination frequency of 1%. Over small intervals, x cM is almost identical to a recombination frequency of x%, but for two genes located wider apart, the observed recombination frequency will be lower than the genetic distance in cM, due to double crossing-over events. Two approximation functions are commonly used to adjust for this, the Kosambi and the Haldane functions. So: recombination frequency is NOT identical to genetic distance in cM. AND, all human chromosomes except the Y chromosome are larger than 50 cM.
The result of the debate was moved. Ian Manka Talk to me! 17:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
| Proposal : | Recombination frequency → Recombination Frequency |
| Rationale : | This is likely a typo, or a very rarely used term. In the talk page for said article, it is discussed by other two members that Recombinant Fraction or Recombination Frequency are used more often. I am in a Genetics course using "Introduction to Genetic Analysis" and that textbook uses Recombination Frequency. I believe the name of the article should be changed to reflect the term more frequently used. |
| Proposer : | Eurisko97 04:21, 12 June 2006 (UTC) |
Please add * Support or * Oppose followed by an optional brief explanation, then sign your vote using "~~~~".
Oppose merge "Linkage" is a much more familiar term. It shouldn't be stuck inside an article on Recombination frequency, which fewer people would go to look up. Sfahey 02:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
There is confusion here between
--Henri de Solages 17:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, in fact in 20+ years I never heard the term "recombinant frequency". Recombinant fraction - yes. Recomination frequency - yes. Otherwise, no. Give it a few days, but then I will butcher this. Any objections, let me know. Ben Carritt 17:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
The beginning poorly defines recombination frequency - its not "when crossing over takes place". Look at the wording, FREQUENCY. It is a mathematical number relating to how often something (recombination) occurs. Unfortunately for me, I don't know exactly what recombination is defined as, will someone please give me the reader's digest version of the defintion?Tourskin 22:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.