GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-03 > 1109765036


From: Thomas Krahn <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] 385i, 385ii ?
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 13:03:56 +0100
References: <20050302033857.015011ECCC2@mail14.mdx.safepages.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050302033857.015011ECCC2@mail14.mdx.safepages.com>


Michael:
I actually refered to the a/b nomenclature that was defined by Kittler
et al. I did this because I want my results to be compatible with the
literature.

In the forensic community unsorted DYS385 values are refered like this:
DYS385 13,16
(look at YHRD, there is no "a" or "b")

The I / II nomenclature is reserved for interupted STR systems that can
be amplified with a single primer pair. The "I" repeat is included in
the "II" repeat. So the forensic community wouldn't be lucky if we would
confuse that.

On the other hand I agree with you that there should be a clear method
to distinguish separated from mixed allele calls. Would it be an idea to
call the loci DYS385alfa and DYS385beta?

BTW: Has anybody got a duplication at DYS385 (4 peaks) ?
How would the nomenclature figure that out?


Thomas Krahn

Michael Crocker wrote:
>>have capability of acquiring NEW knowledge --- the actual order in the
>>chromosome of the two numbers at DYS 385a,b (and in principle YCAIIa,b,
>>459a,b, .... I presume).
>
>
> Since the new test makes them distinguishable, would that not make it more appropriate to refer to them as 385i and 385ii? (but still use a,b without directional test)
>
> Is this likely to be of any use for R1b 11,14 AMH types?
>
>
>
> ==============================
> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the
> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx
>


This thread: