Sigclust, or SC in the following [ 2], is a parametric approach wherein a two-way split of the data is deemed significant if the null hypothesis that the data are drawn from a single multivariate normal distribution is rejected.
If the p-value is small, the test is deemed "significant" and the null hypothesis is rejected (we describe here a common conflation of the Neyman-Pearson test theory, which considers only the rejection or acceptance of the null hypothesis, and Fisher's use of the p value, which is seen as inversely related to the strength of evidence against the null hypothesis).
This was demonstrated in drosophila whereby Tctex1 null mutants were deemed largely viable other than for complete male sterility.
As the QQ plot (Supplementary Material, Fig. S1) and the λ value do not show widespread departure from the null model, we deemed it unnecessary to correct test statistics for inflation.
Furthermore, multinomial logistic regression decreases the probability of false positive findings (none of the findings will be deemed statistically significant unless the overall null-hypothesis is rejected).
However the result of this study suggests that even for microsatellites deemed transferable across species the frequency of null alleles should increase as we move to species more distantly related to E. grandis.
For the 743,878 sites deemed polymorphic from the DGRP data, the null hypothesis of monomorphism was accepted by the ML estimator at the 5% significance level at 373,673 sites, suggesting an overall false-negative rate of the ML estimator of 0.50, again assuming that the DGRP data themselves are correct.
Let be the weights of the edges connecting r to v i. Setting now with and and noting that it is seen that approximately for large enough N. The validity of z(r) to test for statistical significance of the regulator depends on whether the null model described above is deemed appropriate.
Because of the small sample size, fdr (false discovery rate) analysis with an empirical null model (as proposed by Efron) was deemed infeasible.
Such bias emerges when a small-N study with a negative finding is more often "file-drawered" because it is not deemed rigorous enough to constitute decisive rejection of the null, whereas a small-N study with a positive finding would be more often published because it was able to reject the null despite being under-powered.
