GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-03 > 1110403625


From: Doug McDonald <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re ; DNA Print test
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 15:27:05 -0600
References: <20050309171955.37591.qmail@web52101.mail.yahoo.com> <REME20050309161353@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <REME20050309161353@alum.mit.edu>


John Chandler wrote:

> Ellen wrote:
>
>>We know little, if anything, about DNAprints autosomal
>>tests. They are even more mysterious than FTDNA's DNA
>>database - I didn't think I would find a greater
>>mystery than that. What autosomal markers do they
>>use?
>
>
> Ann was able to identify ten of the 72 markers used in the 2.0
> version of the test. See the list archives for that discussion.
> Based on the inferred allele frequencies in the reference
> populations, I have some other guesses as well, but these are
> only guesses.
>
>


Has anybody compared to that actual published paper (recent)
with lots of autosomal markers and the frequency in
Europeans, Asians, and Africans (but not Americans)?

As you might remember, I found a goodly number of markers there
that could be used to make a "biogeographical" test.

Doug McDonald


This thread: