GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-11 > 1133163528
From: Dienekes Pontikos <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] J1 or J2 were originally ALL CMH?
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 23:38:48 -0800
References: <4387486E.firstname.lastname@example.org> <00d701c5f1f7$7461cdb0$408eb840@JamesRCarr> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <000201c5f379$be85cf80$79bf19ac@sasonb46c858c2> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <001601c5f3bf$93211890$6600a8c0@D7PXMV11>
On 11/27/05, George Haynes <> wrote:
> It was getting tiresome typing DiGiacomo's
> J2-(DYS413<=18)(xJ2a,J2f) anyway.
Actually you still have to type it that way, because DYS413 is
downstream from J2a. There are some J2a chromosomes that are
DYS413>18. So, J2-(DYS413<=18)(xJ2a,J2f) gives the maximum
People with a short DYS413 can be sure to be in clade J2a. People with
a long one that are negative for J2b (old J2e, or M12) can also be
very certain that they are in J2a.
The authors promise a supplement which defines the new J2 phylogenetic
changes in detail. I will blog about this once it becomes available.
Dienekes' Anthropology Blog
|Re: [DNA] J1 or J2 were originally ALL CMH? by Dienekes Pontikos <>|