GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2004-10 > 1096735498


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re: GENEALOGY-DNA-D Digest V04 #761
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 10:44:58 -0600
References: <1dc.2ca1a09c.2e902df2@aol.com>


All markers are not equally useful for reaching conclusions of a specific
type; and the importance of various markers is different from haplogroup to
haplogroup. The same goes for the panels of a dozen markers. There is
nothing intrinsically equal about the different panels. Detailed studies of
the mutation rates of the markers in the different panels need to be done in
order to even say each panel is of comparable usefulness for the simplest
use --- establishing the AVERAGE mutation rate over all the markers used.

But it is safe to say that the more markers, the more information you have,
and you are less subject to the purely random flucuations of match versus
no-match which occur with too few markers. There is never "certainty" or
"knowing positively" that you are related to someone from these genetic
tests. You come close to certainty in some cases in showing that people are
not related.

Ken
----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 10:14 AM
Subject: [DNA] Re: GENEALOGY-DNA-D Digest V04 #761


> Allen and LIST
> I'm not trying to answer this message, just commenting again on what I
> can't understand. This subject keeps coming up again and again with the
answers
> from the list that it is just the way it is. If so, then there is limited
> value in the DNA information we are getting.
> We have three sets of markers, which as I understand it, each set is
> equal to the other in their importance. Suppose they develop a forth set
38-49. We
> have seen matches on 25 markers go from closely related to completely
> unrelated when the subjects go to the third set 26-37. So I presume that
you could
> have a definitely related match on 37 markers and then go to a genetic
distance
> of 16 just like it has happened on 25 markers. Where does it end, is there
a
> quantity of markers that will ever let you know positively that you are
related
> to someone?
> Jack Mc
>
> In a message dated 10/2/2004 9:26:00 AM Central Daylight Time,
> writes:
> From: "Allen Grant" <>
> To:
> Message-ID: <002f01c4a823$0140c440$>
> Subject: DNA Markers
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="Windows-1252"
>
> I have recently received markers 25-37 and really do not know how to
> interpret the values. From reading the threads from this group, it
appears that there
> are a number of "experts" on the topic. Can anyone tell what all these
> markers mean, aside from the fact that two people with the same DNA are
related
> somewhere back in time? Do some of these markers identify the location
from
> which the "family" originated? If one does not have an exact match, which
markers
> are the most important to suggest a strong connection? To the contrary,
> which markers must match to assure a connection?
>
> Another Grant and I had a 25/25 match, with a 50% probability of having a
> connection within 7 generations. Now we have 37 markers and a genetic
distance
> of 3 and a 50% probability of a connection within 19 generations....I
don't
> understand this! Locus 30, 32 & 36 are different by 1
>
>
> ==============================
> Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration
> Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more.
> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237
>
>


This thread: