# Table 1 Type 1 error rate comparisons based on 5000 simulations of 100 sib pairs under two different types of null models. Null model A is the model simulated under no heritability due to the testing QTL and no polygenic heritability. Null model B is the model without heritability due to the testing QTL but with polygenic heritability h2 and $σ a 2 2 MathType@MTEF@5@5@+=feaafiart1ev1aaatCvAUfKttLearuWrP9MDH5MBPbIqV92AaeXatLxBI9gBaebbnrfifHhDYfgasaacH8akY=wiFfYdH8Gipec8Eeeu0xXdbba9frFj0=OqFfea0dXdd9vqai=hGuQ8kuc9pgc9s8qqaq=dirpe0xb9q8qiLsFr0=vr0=vr0dc8meaabaqaciaacaGaaeqabaqabeGadaaakeaaiiGacqWFdpWCdaqhaaWcbaGaemyyaeMaeGOmaidabaGaeGOmaidaaaaa@31D2@$ = 1. The other underlying parameters are (β0, β1, β2) = (1, 1, 1), and (σ2, α) = (7, 0.5). The assumed s(t) is labeled as "i" for s0 + s1t, and "q" for s0 + s1t + s2t2.

T h 2 Assumed s(t) Significance level
0.05 0.01 0.001
Null model A
5 0.0 l 0.045 0.010 0.0012
q 0.051 0.011 0.0008
4 0.0 l 0.041 0.009 0.0005
q 0.048 0.009 0.0005
2 0.0 l 0.042 0.005 0.0008
q 0.040 0.006 0.0005
Null model B
5 0.190 l 0.040 0.006 0.0006
q 0.053 0.009 0.0014
4 0.174 l 0.041 0.008 0.0004
q 0.052 0.010 0.0006
2 0.141 l 0.040 0.008 0.0008
q 0.038 0.005 0.0006