GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-08 > 1154650170
From: (John Chandler)
Subject: Re: [DNA] research strategy for genealogists
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 20:09:30 -0400 (EDT)
In-Reply-To: <00eb01c6b701$b869ce70$6401a8c0@HP> (DNA@dgmweb.net)
> The paleoanthropologists and geneticists studying SNPs are
> also using cladistic analysis. Why are genealogists still assessing
> "resemblance," instead of using cladistics?
I can think of four reasons, at least:
1. In a typical surname DNA project, a large number of testees are an
exact match with their reconstructed progenitor.
2. In a typical ditto, most mutations within a group are restricted to
one test subject each.
3. Half the time, when two (and only two) people in a group actually
share a mutation, it turns out to be two separate, parallel
mutations. (That doesn't stop me from making predictions based
on shared mutations, but I'm always careful to say "probably".)
4. The initial task for a new test subject is always to assign him to
the right group, if any. Genetic distance is by far the most
convenient method for assignment and for the discovery of new
matches leading to the creation of new groups.