GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-11 > 1162919089
From: Adrian Williams <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Conference [recLOH]
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 11:04:49 -0600
Very good questions and before I dig myself into a deeper hole, I am
trying to get in touch with FTDNA to clarify this. As soon as I get a
solid answer, then I will post it here!
> In a message dated 11/7/2006 7:53:42 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>> It used to be that each marker set was examined separately when
>> determining mismatched markers. For example, if two kits had a marker
>> mismatch at 385, 464 and CDY, then this would be 3 steps....well, now
>> because of the discovery of recLOH, this is only 1 step...it doesn't
>> matter how many of the palindromic markers are mismatched. Any number of
>> mismatches on them results in a total of 1 step.
> That's much broader than the way recLOH has been described previously on this
> list, and I find it puzzling. In the first place, DYS385 is on a different
> palindrome (#4) than DYS464 and CDY (#1). In the second place, only certain
> changes qualified to be examples of recLOH, e.g.
> DYS385a/b = 11-14 as the ancestral haplotype (two different alleles,
> DYS385a/b = 14-14 or 11-11 as the haplotype in one branch (identical alleles,
> I can readily accept the above example as recLOH. It sounds like now you're
> saying that the whole set below would count as 1 step, but maybe I
> DYS385a/b 11-14 and 11-15
> DYS464a/b/c/d 15-15-17-17 and 15-16-17-17
> CDYa/b 37-38 and 37-39
> Could you give us some concrete examples of counting genetic distance? And
> what about DYS459a/b (palindrome #1) and YCAII a/b (which is on palindrome #5)?
> Ann Turner
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
|Re: [DNA] Conference [recLOH] by Adrian Williams <>|