GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-01 > 1138490931
From: (John Chandler)
Subject: Re: [DNA] autosomal testing
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 18:28:51 -0500 (EST)
References: <43DA63A5.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <REME20060127215313@alum.mit.edu> <email@example.com>
In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (message fromthomas goulde on Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:17:32 -0500)
> I assume that you mean that the research backing the interpretation of
> the markers is proprietary. I received a long list of markers with my
> results from DNAP.
They don't interpret the markers. They just estimate the percentages
of overall admixture. Then again, I happen to know that they have
experimented with reports that do include marker-by-marker interpretation,
but what I've heard does not indicate a truly meaningful product.
In any case, the long list you received is a list of *their* numbers
for the markers they use. As Ann explained already, the true identities
of most of the markers are secret.
> DNAP statistical formulae are also, doubtless, proprietary.
The statistics end of things is dead simple. I posted a tutorial
here a year or two ago that worked through a simple example of the
estimation technique. See the archives.