Cavanagh et al. Genetics Selection Evolution 2010, 42:36 http://www.gsejournal.org/content/42/1/36 Page 9 of 14 Figure 4 QTL map of the entire genome for total bone, carcass bone and bone percentage. Table 3 Summary of significant QTL for carcass traits using QTL Express under a two-QTL model OAR Trait 1 1 9 18 19 Carcass lean Percent bone in carcass Eye muscle area Percent fat in carcass Internal fat Position QTL [cM] with flanking markers A B F-value 2 vs 01 40 BMS835-OARHH51 72 OARHH51-BM6465 72 ILST011-MAF33 80 BM7243-OARHH47 80 OAFCB304-MCM111 272 INRA011-BM6506 216 MAF64-CSSM4 76 MAF33-BMS1304 88 TGLA122-MCM38 88 MCM111-OARCP88 9.4* 6.8* 6.8* 6.0 7.1* 2 vs 12 8.7* 7.3* 6.8* 8.1* 11** Herit [%]4 9.5 6.9 6.8 5.9 7.1 A QTL effect SD (SE)3 B 0.642 (0.218) 0.803 (0.258) -74.3 (26.5) 102.2 (37.6) -0.0198 (0.0054) 0.0207 (0.0057) 62.6 (18.2) -3.54 (0.94) -55.7 (18.2) 3.35 (0.92) 1F(2 versus 0) is F-statistic for testing two QTL vs no QTL on chromosome 2F(2 versus 1) is F-statistic for testing two QTL vs one QTL on chromosome 3standardised QTL effect (SD) = QTL Effect/Residual Std Dev; and the standard error (SE) of QTL positions A and B 4variance or QTL heritability as a proportion of the phenotypic variance accounted for by the QTL in % * chromosome-wide P < 0.05; ** chromosome-wide P < 0.01