GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1119891750
From: "Lowe DNA" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] P25
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 12:02:38 -0500
Looking forward to hearing more...all of us now realize that deep SNP
will resolve our guesstimating with these doggone STR's....
We need the 9 or 10 major haplogroups verified down to the sub-clade with
level SNP testing. Then we can try to connect the dots between the recent
genealogy typified by STRs and the deep ancestry with SNPs.
With the exception of Jim and yourself and your vigorous pursuit of these
SNP sub-clades, where is the rest of the academics community. It appears
are sitting back on their assets..
From: David Faux [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] P25
I fear that some are going to make the leap from recent reported findings
and assume that they are R1b1c. This is entirely unacceptable in my view.
Unless one is tested specifically for M269 then they are guessing. FTDNA
tests for P25 only. Virtually all of the R1b in Y search etc. comes from
guesswork and probability assumptions based for example on matches in the
FTDNA Haplogroup database. I am as guilty as the rest since I placed "R1b"
there prior to being tested for P25 or M269. There needs to be a way to
indicate clearly whether one was SNP tested and by which lab.
Recently our lab tested 8 people for M269 (myself included) and all were
positive for this marker. As far as I know only they have the "proper
authority" to put R1b1c into Ysearch. In a few days I will provide details
as to how other people can have this or virtually any published SNP marker
|RE: [DNA] P25 by "Lowe DNA" <>|