GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

From: John Lerch <>
Subject: That's why it's wise to do a systematic and simultaneous search on allmarkers at once, as Bob Stafford described. To maximize the informationreturn from each search, you need to put in a guess on every marker onevery search, and you need to make sure you never make the same wrongguess twicRe: [DNA] re: SMGF Search Technique
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 12:18:18 -0600

John Chandler wrote
That's why it's wise to do a systematic and simultaneous search on all
markers at once, as Bob Stafford described. To maximize the information
return from each search, you need to put in a guess on every marker on
every search, and you need to make sure you never make the same wrong
guess twic

Although true, I figured I couldn't do more than 5 at a time; I didn't know then that the search on patronyms would let you go down to zero percent correct. As I said in my post, my guess is that they're going to put a percentage basement in their patronymic search at some time--because of the privacy they've promised and because of the wishes of commercial labs (one of which they're intimitately tied in with even.) If your sample gets posted before that happens, you're in luck.
JAL

This thread:

• That's why it's wise to do a systematic and simultaneous search on allmarkers at once, as Bob Stafford described. To maximize the informationreturn from each search, you need to put in a guess on every marker onevery search, and you need to make sure you never make the same wrongguess twicRe: [DNA] re: SMGF Search Technique by John Lerch <>