Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1118260024

From: "robert mclaren" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] DNA Analysis for Conventional Genealogy vs. Deep Ancestry
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 15:47:04 -0400


I do believe that another panel of markers, mainly very fast moving, will
help in sorting out family lines. For example, I have two 4th cousins,
once removed, in my project. They are identical at 25 markers. At this
time, I see no need to ask them to upgrade to 37 markers. However, once I
get more members of that particular family group (the U MacLarens in the
Clan files), I will need to go to 37 markers to see how everyone fits in.
(Since we are Scots, I do need good reasons to convince Clansmen to spend

Now, there is a reasonable probability that these two 4th cousins, once
removed, would still match 37/37. In that case, I would like some way to
tell the two lines apart (so that I can fit in others who do not have
detailed genealogy). Of course, the downside is that the price will go up
with an additional panel. And, as you noted, more testing will have to be
done in a family group so as to identify where the mutation(s) took place.
However, with this in hand, we can refine our genealogy to a degree we
cannot do today with DNA testing.

Bob McLaren

> [Original Message]
> From: Kenneth V. Graves <>
> To: <>
> Date: 6/8/2005 2:15:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] DNA Analysis for Conventional Genealogy vs. Deep
> In a previous message I wrote:
> Are there techniques that we could be developing that would better allow
> determining exact connections? I suspect that if we tested enough markers
> (perhaps including types that are not now tested) we would find that for
> each transmission event there is some sort of change/mutation. Although
> of these might not have long-term stability, we might be able to find
> something unique for each transmission event, allowing us to pinpoint the
> exact connection with a lineage. Maybe some enterprising person could
> find a way to screen the genome for changes connected with a specific
> transmission event or lineage.
> I was mainly referring to Y-DNA testing in this paragraph. I also realize
> that any methodology for doing this might require many descendants of a
> common ancestor to be tested, and that we have previously discussed on
> list the value of testing more markers. My question is: Do any of our
> experts see the general concept of the preceding paragraph as promising?
> Ken
> ==============================
> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the
> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more:

This thread: