GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-11 > 1131773840


From: David Faux <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Haplogroup I
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 21:37:20 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <002801c5e747$053dd600$71509045@Ken1>


Ken Nordtvedt <> wrote:


David, Yes, it is a serious problem if someone is called M170+ based on an
actual P19+ test . But what caught my eye was that you then found them
negative for M170. So did you go back and check the claimed P19+ result of
another lab? Some of us in haplogroup I have been looking for just such a
haplotype which can very well exist --- negative for one and positive for
another of what some segment of the community called redundant or equivalent
SNPs. Such a haplotype would of course be very interesting, as it could
give a glimpse of a an I haplotype motif from early in that haplogroup's
existence.

Ken
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ken:



We are aware of two possible scenarios here. First the P19+ result from another testing company might have been wrong. Secondly, if the P19+ is correct and the participant is M170- (already established) then this would suggest that the two markers are not phylogenetically equivalent and that there is a new clade that has not been documented. The P19 test via direct sequencing was ordered a couple of weeks ago. I expect that our customer will wish to report the finding to the List but that will be his choice.



David Faux.






Dr. David K.W. Faux
President
Ethnoancestry USA, Inc.
www.ethnodna.com








This thread: