GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1117736007
From: Robert Stafford <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] What to test for? Why not test mtDNA?
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 11:13:27 -0700 (PDT)
Our trying to do it with random testing is too haphazard to achieve the desired results. We would first need to do a concentrated study in a limited geographic area to see if it would work. We are also limited to the tests that commercial laboratories offer.
Using after-tax dollars to pay commercial testing laboratories is not very cost-effective. Collectively, we would get more bang for our buck by contributing the money and (samples) to a research organization such as SMGF (don't know if they accept outside contributions though.). They can conduct more tests per dollar than we can. If they find any answers, we will know we aren't wasting our money on testing. We will also know what is the right test.
A year ago Ugo Perego at SMGF summarized the situation of using MtDNA for genealogical purposes:
You may want to contact SMGF to find out if they have looked into the strategy you suggest.
Again, the high-res mtDNA test has not been fully exploited, in my opinion.
If your ancestress arrived in the USA within the last 100 years, it may be
less useful -- but then you probably have some good genealogical information
on her anyway. Before 1900, however, I think grouping high-resolution mtDNA
results by locations and time period may prove to be more genealogically
useful than we think. If there's any chance of ferreting out an LNU wife, I think
we should test our mtDNA lines, build the database, and see what it can do