Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1119171521

From: Thomas Krahn <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] DYS459a/b
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 11:04:12 +0200
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>

Dear Phil:

I'm quite shure, that all of them should be reported as 9/10
and 10/9 might be some kind of typo.

As far as I know, nobody has ever typed DYS459 alleles separately. The
flanking regions of the DYS459 repeat are +/- 10000 bp identical with
only a very few exceptions:

1.) There is a mononucleotide repeat (a poly-A sequence) about 130 bases
upstream from the GDB forward primer.

2.) There is a trinucleotide repeat (taa)n about 5930 bp upstream of the
GDB forward primer.

3.) There is a G/T SNP in the HUGO DNA sequences about 9720 bp upstream
of the GDB forward primer.

4.) There is a G/A SNP in the HUGO DNA sequences about 10700 bp
downstream of the GDB forward primer.

That's all. The rest of the flanking region is absolutely identical.
(3) and (4) are very far away from the repeat. A PCR product of about
10000 bp is very difficult to generate and there's a good chance that a
possible distinctive primer would also find a more or less unspecific
binding site in the 10000 bp rest of the sequence range. So I wouldn't
expect that this method would work.

The trinucleotide repeat (2) is interesting by itself and I'm working on
good primers for it. I call it CoDYS459. However, it is too far off from
the DYS459 repeat sequence. It can't be used to separate the DYS459
alleles either.

At the moment I'm making up my mind, on how we could use the
mononucleotide repeat (1) for separating the DYS459 alleles. The HUGO
sequence shows a length variation of one nucleotide and it would be
possible to construct primers closely upstream of (1) and still get a
reasonable PCR product of about 320 bp length, including DYS459 and (1).
By comparing the PCR products with- and without (1) we might learn
something about the different DYS459 alleles. The technique would be
quite similar to the DYS385I / II system. However, no practical
experiments have been done so far.

Because of all that, I'm quite shure, that FTDNA has typed the DYS459
alleles conventionally.


> List,
> I received three new results in the Goff Surname DNA Study from DNA Heritage, all of which are focused on Goff families in NC/TN. One result (descendant of James E. Goff b. 1805 NC) is a 23/25 match with a descendant of Stephen Goff (1742CT-1799NC). See for details of the Stephen Goff haplotype. DYS 459a and DSY459b are the mistmatched markers. The values are 9/10 for the Stephen Goff descendant, who was tested by FTDNA, and 10/9 for the James E. Goff descendant, who was tested by DNAH.
> I've searched the List archives and can't find whether there is a convention at FTDNA to report 459 as low/high, much like 464. If so, this increases the chance that this is really a 25/25 match. With a surname match and North Carolina in common, a 25/25 match would seem to indicate a close genealogical relationship between Stephen Goff and James E. Goff, who are not otherwise known to be related.
> Does anyone know if FTDNA reports all 459 values as low/high? Thanks,
> Phil Goff
> ==============================
> New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more:

This thread: