GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-05 > 1051831799


From: "Georgia K. Bopp" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Are the 1st 12 markers a base or core set?
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 13:29:59 -1000
References: <000d01c3102b$08d1a120$6501a8c0@indpnd01.mo.comcast.net>


Keep in mind that the "1st 12 markers" are associated with FTDNA testing -
not with other companies. However, here's a clip from my Q & A (part two,
draft, not on my website):

Q. Are the first 12 markers more important than the remaining 13?

A. No. The first 12 are NOT more important than the remaining 13 markers.
The first 12 were just "discovered" and/or marketed before the remaining 13.

Q. Are the first 12 markers more stable than the remaining 13?

A. The first 12 are not necessarily more stable than the other 13. According
to FTDNA, of the 25 markers they test, the 5 fastest "moving" or mutating
DYS/markers are: 464, 449, 439, 385, and 458 (in that order). DYS 439 and
385 (a and b) are in their twelve marker test. DYS 464, 449, and 458 are in
the remaining thirteen marker test. However, administrators of large surname
studies report variations that differ from those in the mixed random group.

I sent the above to FTDNA for comments and they responded:

"Both answers are correct. It might be important to point out that you can
obtain Haplogroup info from the first 12 markers."

I don't know what all this means for Roy's group as far as haplogroups are
concerned. I'm fuzzy on the haplogroup game - but maybe someone else will
respond to that.

Aloha,
Georgia
Georgia Kinney Bopp
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~gkbopp/KINNEY/Research/results.htm

This thread: