Out of 119 markers, 45 markers were linked to major-effect grain yield QTLs under drought such as qDTY 1.1, qDTY 2.1, qDTY 2.2, qDTY 3.1, qDTY 4.1, qDTY 9.1, qDTY 10.1, qDTY 12.1, qDTY 1.2 and qDTY 2.3 and all the remaining markers were randomly distributed within the genome (Additional file 3: Table S9).
None of the cases examined of each type of cancer expressed a complete array of normal endothelial markers, suggesting that these endothelial cell markers are randomly expressed depending on environmental cures.
The succeeding markers were randomly generated using Bernoulli (p) where p depends on the genotype of the previous marker; that is, if the previous marker genotype was 0, then the next marker genotype was Bernoulli (r) and ifit was 1, then Bernoulli (1−r).
Three markers, i.e., 1_0308 (LG1_10591059 (LG2) and 1_1298 (LG6) show slight change in orders between the two maps; however, since these markers are randomly distributed, such changes maybe due to the presence of additional flanking SSR loci or different mapping LOD threshold used.
Both QTL and markers were randomly distributed over the chromosome.
Fourteen putative CAPS markers were randomly selected for validation.
A statistical programme that assumes markers are randomly distributed gave an estimate of intra-marker distance.
Each time, half of the 250 markers were randomly selected, making two equally numerous but independent groups of markers.
Cells expressing these markers were randomly distributed in tumour xenografts and were not localized specifically at the tumour/stroma interface.
To evaluate whether markers were randomly distributed, we tested the procedure explained in Echt et al. [ 38].
