GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1119914586


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re: SNPs for Haplogroup I
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 17:23:06 -0600
References: <auto-000003826271@mail1.warpdriveonline.com>


Glen, I agree with you if my hunch is correct that Ix is found NOT to be
I1b, I1c, or even the long shot I1a. I think the logical order of things to
do is first test Ix for P37 and then M223 if P37 is negative. If negative
for both, then we get a critical mass of crowd together and start a riot at
the University of Arizona demanding that the information necessary for
producing the P38 test be shared with the rest of the scientific community,
especially if P38 had been discovered using public monies received from
federal research grants. Public universities are supposed to be places that
serve the public interest.

How does that game plan sound?

Ken


----- Original Message -----
From: "Glen Todd" <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 5:13 PM
Subject: RE: [DNA] Re: SNPs for Haplogroup I


>
> > David ...
> >
> > I'd like have M307 & P40 tested. Ken & I had the identical
> > results with Trace Genetics: P30+, P40+, M307- for I1a1.
> > With Phil Goff that's 3 I've seen so far :-)
>
> Well, for me (and the Ix project) the kicker seems to be the perennially
> problematic P38 (how's that for alliteration?). Without that, I don't
see
> how we can tell the difference between I* and I1*, and I think that
there's
> sort of a consensus that Ix is in one or the other.
>
> Glen
>
>
> ==============================
> Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the
> areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months.
> Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx
>
>



This thread: