GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2002-09 > 1032563060
From: lmpa and jg <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] DNA Results
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 16:04:30 -0700 (PDT)
Wed, 18 Sep 2002 13:44:00 -0400
:"John S Walden" <> wrote:
>Do we have enough samples we can do more than just
>first 12 second 13 markers
>Does it make any difference if we looked at the last
12 for matches
>and then the first 13 (or 11 for ancestry.com data)
>Or can we make a random selection .. <snip>
>There should be nothing special about what we use as
the first 12
> John W
I agree there should be a way to get much more
learning out of the collective experience of people
who have run surname studies and published test
results. And I'm eager to see more results published.
The 154 cases I used for the 12-marker vs. 25-marker
exercise constituted barely an "OK" sample size --
I've since collected (but not yet processed) about 30
more, and am hoping the pace will continue.
Comparing the first 12 vs. remaining 13 markers is
still valid, I believe, because questions keep coming
up on the list about: a) whether or not to start with
a lower priced 12-marker test, and b) how to decide
when to pay for an upgrade to 25-markers.
As for trying random combinations of other sets of
markers - that certainly could be done. And there are
surely more sophisticated statistical analyses that
could be used to determine which markers have the
greatest discriminating power. ... I'm wishing more
and more for Orin's big database of results across all
In the meantime I will plod on collecting 25-marker
cases and will let you know when there may be enough
to get into more interesting things.
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
|Re: [DNA] DNA Results by lmpa and jg <>|