Parameter | Neck BMS | Body BMS5 | Tail BMS | Total BMS |
---|
| 0.26 ± 0.11 | 0.37 ± 0.14 | 0.34 ± 0.13 | 2.95 ± 0.90 |
| 0.12 ± 0.04 | 0.27 ± 0.05 | 0.21 ± 0.04 | 1.97 ± 0.30 |
| 0.18 ± 0.04 | 0.27 ± 0.06 | 0.14 ± 0.04 | 1.6 ± 0.32 |
| 1.65 ± 0.25 | 2.56 ± 0.56 | 2.19 ± 0.30 | 19.13 ± 2.40 |
| 0.55 ± 0.22 | 0.67 ± 0.21 | 0.99 ± 0.23 | 0.90 ± 0.15 |
| 0.09 ± 0.05 | -0.04 ± 0.04 | -0.09 ± 0.03 | -0.02 ± 0.04 |
| 1.40 ± 0.12 | 3.15 ± 0.21 | 2.80 ± 0.18 | 14.8 ± 1.01 |
| 3.07 ± 0.20 | 3.90 ± 0.25 | 6.10 ± 0.32 | 24.77 ± 1.54 |
| 3.54 ± 0.11 | 4.95 ± 0.14 | 5.31 ± 0.16 | 31.09 ± 1.00 |
| 0.07 ± 0.10 | 0.07 ± 0.03 | 0.06 ± 0.02 | 0.10 ± 0.03 |
| 0.47 ± 0.08 | 0.52 ± 0.21 | 0.41 ± 0.06 | 0.61 ± 0.08 |
- 1Model 5 was y = Xb + Z
D
a
D
+ Z
S
a
S
+ Vg * s + e; 2from Equation 2 using a pen size of 3.18; is the non-genetic correlation between phenotypes of cage mates of the same sex; 4 for BMS, phenotypic variance was estimated from a separate analysis using the model y = Xb + e, this was done because our objective was to present a single number for phenotypic variance and heritability, covering both sexes since a single genetic variance was fitted covering both sexes; however, since our aim was to estimate the other model terms with the best fitting model, a separate analysis for phenotypic variance was performed; the standard errors of heritability estimates were calculated from the full model, averaging the residual variances for both sexes; 5although Model 4 was slightly better, we presented estimates obtained with Model 5 for reasons of consistency; . .