GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-12 > 1133495427


From: "Phil Goff" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Its name is IJ
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 21:50:27 -0600
References: <20051201171635.65625.qmail@web50703.mail.yahoo.com> <001901c5f6b1$cb306d40$79bf19ac@sasonb46c858c2> <008b01c5f6e4$1214b310$4d423947@YOURF8387228BF> <op.s04zmwlkpqnhvj@pablo.wv.mentorg.com>


David,

I wasn't stating what I believed to be the best answer. Rather, I was
pointing out that I don't believe Sasson properly interpreted the guidance
contained in "A Nomenclature System for the Tree of Human Y-Chromosome
Binary Haplogroups." Do you think that P14, M89 and M213 are unlabeled in
this 2002 paper? If so, we have a legitimate basis for disagreement. I am
not familiar with the rules of nomenclature for mtDNA, so I can't say
whether Y-Chromosome nomenclature is different than mtDNA nomenclature.

While YCC may do a poor job of maintaining their tree, it seems to me that
they created a flexible framework. The latter is more important to the
future updates. If we are to dynamically update this tree in the future, the
updates should be driven by rules and standards. Otherwise, there will be
disagreement, which does not further the cause of updating the tree. Thanks,

Phil Goff


----- Original Message -----
From: "David F Reynolds" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Its name is IJ


> If you look at the accepted mtDNA terminology, you'll see references to
> HV, the join of subclades H and V. This is no different--I agree with
> Sasson's interpretation, that S22+ would be IJ.
>
> And besides--regardless of whether you factor S22 into the picture or not,
> haplogroups G-K are in fact all subclades of F. If YCC didn't choose to
> call them F1-F5 to start with, why we would do so now?
>
> --david

This thread: