GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-03 > 1141262567


From: "victor villarreal" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] PubMed abstract: large-scale changes on the Y
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 19:22:47 -0600
References: <1a2.45c564eb.3135dc5c@aol.com> <010801c63cad$ec70c4e0$7898893e@Masterbedroom> <4405BAE4.6010100@scs.uiuc.edu> <936471110603010758u6d6021a8r8e7a23d7c9873fc8@mail.gmail.com> <4405E814.3060706@scs.uiuc.edu> <4405F5A3.3060002@sbcglobal.net>
In-Reply-To: <4405F5A3.3060002@sbcglobal.net>


Could you please quote that paragraph where the study says that they found
94 "additional" SNPs" please.

Victor

On 3/1/06, Alfred A. Aburto Jr. <> wrote:
>
> Yes. They resquenced the 47 chromosomes defining the tree shown in Fig
> SM6 and they found 94 additional SNPs.They were afraid of bias in the 47
> SNPs they had because some regions might have been sequenced more than
> others, so they resquenced and found 94 additional (not necessarily new)
> SNPs. Someone should write to them ...
> Al
>
>

This thread: