GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-03 > 1142269524


From: ahunt <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Order of STR markers
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 09:05:24 -0800
References: <BKEPIIDHHKEPCMDIEBKBOEEMCPAA.andrew.en.inge@skynet.be> <000c01c645ef$c86636c0$bec79045@Ken1> <44144C36.6020704@scs.uiuc.edu> <00ce01c645f8$73060c60$d426fea9@CLONE> <00ea01c645ff$e8a767a0$d426fea9@CLONE> <014c01c64670$6449afb0$2e01a8c0@HPDESKTOP> <000701c64672$e993a020$d426fea9@CLONE>
In-Reply-To: <000701c64672$e993a020$d426fea9@CLONE>


I think you are mentioning the way Genegraphic Project lay out the markers.

David Zincavage wrote:

>I could not help but notice that a convention exists, at least here, of
>referring to STR markers in an order startin with: 388, 390, 19. Where does
>that choice of markers, as a starting point of taxonomy, come from?
>
>What specific STR marker number sequence should be preferred?
>
>DZ
>
>
>==============================
>New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more: http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429
>
>
>
>
>



This thread: