GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-03 > 1110423683
From: (Raymond Whritenour)
Subject: Re: [DNA] reliability of the DNAPrint test
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 22:01:23 -0500
In-Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org (John Chandler)'s message of Wed, 9Mar 2005 21:36:43 -0500 (EST)
Many thanks! I now see ("through a glass darkly") what it is you're
saying. In the end, I come out satisfied that the BGA triangle chart
CAN be useful in determining the probability of having a true non-zero
admixture (minority ancestry), providing the original BG database is
trustworthy. This is, at least, something.
John Chandler wrote:
"So, if one's first confidence interval (black line on DNAPrint's
triangle chart) is entirely above the edge (base line) of the triangle,
then one can say with 88% "confidence" that his TRUE minority ancestry
percentage lies somewhere above the bottom of that first confidence
interval? Why isn't that the same as saying there is an 88% probability
of a non-zero admixture?"
It *is* the same.
|Re: [DNA] reliability of the DNAPrint test by (Raymond Whritenour)|