APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2009-06 > 1243971671


From: Ida Skarson McCormick <>
Subject: Re: [APG] Date of Conception [Y-DNA]
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 12:41:11 -0700
References: <510090e40906011359u45dea5ceje6fe4e5fe8d42eae@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20090601164518.05726030@seanet.com><4A24A2BD.4060804@integrity.com><7.0.1.0.2.20090602003416.058a2948@seanet.com><COL108-W42067AC750DC2D3D7421CB924D0@phx.gbl><200906021410.n52EAao1025556@mail.rootsweb.com>
In-Reply-To: <200906021410.n52EAao1025556@mail.rootsweb.com>


I agree. However, I don't bother with contacting matches at anything
less than 37 markers. A couple of years ago I heard Sorensen say the
test should be for a minimum of 42 markers (I think it was). If a
match is good at 37 but falls apart at 67, then it is not worth
contacting that person for genealogically meaningful information, in
my opinion.

Upgrading markers incrementally can ultimately wind up costing more
than ordering the full 67 at once, especially if someone is testing
himself or a close family member.

--Ida Skarson McCormick, , Seattle

At 07:10 AM 6/2/2009, Steve Gauss wrote:
>I agree with Michael Hait. Y-DNA testing is mostly used to confirm or
>deny that two males are descended from the same male ancestor. <snip>
>
>At 09:03 AM 6/2/2009, Michael Hait wrote:
> >I believe a 12-marker test might be sufficient to disprove the
> >theory, if there are any related males in the current Y-DNA
> >databases. <snip>


This thread: