GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-03 > 1109733472


From: <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] 385a,b values (gum ample)
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 22:17:52 -0500 (EST)
References: <229170-220053322620808@M2W060.mail2web.com> <002c01c51ece$47c70a10$eb409145@Ken1>
In-Reply-To: <002c01c51ece$47c70a10$eb409145@Ken1>


> David, Just to make it absolutely clear to everyone, when you say your
> result was the "reverse of the 11, 13 value pair reported by FTDNA",
> your next two sentences sentences must be remembered as part of your
> message. There is no "error" being corrected; FTDNA's report was just a
> convention to report the short then long segment which until Dr. Krahn's
> lab capability came along was all that was measured for us consumers.
>> Ken
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 7:06 PM
> Subject: [DNA] 385a,b values (gum ample)
>
>
>> I have just received word from Thomas Krahn of biotix that my 385a,b
>> readings are as follows:
>>
>> 385a = 13
>> 385b = 11
>>
>> I express my appreciation to Thomas and his lab for this speedy,
>> generous and informative assessment of an interesting locus. >>
>> David Wilson

And I as well want to thank Thomas, ditto the words David used above!

Mine to, reversed the "conventional" method of low to high reporting of
the numbers:

385a = 16
385b = 15

on my apparent I1c or I2, haplotype, whatever, per Whit's predictor and
Ken's helpfulness! And, rest assured, I know there was not a "mistake" in
the original reporting, just conventional reporting of what was known at
the time.

Clyde Rice



This thread: