GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-01 > 1106610857
Subject: Re: [DNA] Question regarding MtDNA Subtyping
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 18:54:17 EST
In a message dated 01/24/05 10:34:20 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> In any case, reading Table 1, it discusses the number
> and proportion of H MtDNAs, and in the next column,
> the number of H MtDNAs sub-typed for the study. There
> is sometimes a significant difference between these
> two columns. Does anyone have any suggestions as to
> why a number of these H results were never sub-typed?
It looks like the column for "Number and Proportion" is the total samples
they had on hand with HVR1 data (HVS-I in the paper). It's still an expensive and
time-consuming job to sequence DNA. It must be done in small segments, a few
hundred bases at a time.
> For example, if you examine the Ashkenazi H results,
> only 29 out of 119 were subtyped. I know this isn't
> due to the remainder falling to the CRS, because only
> 40 out of the 119 do. This leaves 50 results that
> were never sub-typed. Do I assume that the remaining
> 50 fall into H sub-clades not addressed in the study
When I look at the percentages of subtypes, it seems like there's some
inconsistency in rounding, but I don't see where you get the 40? It looks to me like
90 were not subtyped, so you can't assume anything about the subclades.
Anyway, with such a small sample, I don't think you can draw many conclusions
about the distribution in Ashkenazi Jews (except that they do show up in
different subclades, so there are probably multiple origins).
Ann Turner - GENEALOGY-DNA List Administrator
Search or Browse the archives, Subscribe or Unsubscribe at