GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-12 > 1166661239


From: David Faux <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Haplogroup Q (was Order of importance)
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:33:59 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <IGEOKAGLHNEKPCKPADIGKEKMMOAA.bbailey.lowedna@baileyconnection.com>


Bill:

Thank you for these files. They will undoubtedly help to narrow the search somewhat. What would be helpful, but it is asking beyond what science can tell us right now, is the time to most recent ancestor in each cluster. I am beginning to dispair that the task will not be accomplished even by the brightest minds in statistics (fudge facors, confidence intervals and so on) until we haul out of some cave somewhere samples that are surrounded by enough carbon for standard archaeological dating, and whose level of preservation offers the opportunity to have Y-STR data on even 10 markers. One 2000 year old necropolis in Mongolia is all we have and I am having difficulty in identifying any of the haplotypes as clearly Q - especially when the difference between Q and P requires a SNP to separate the two haplotypes. I am also pinning a lot of my hopes on the Genographic Project on sampling widely among the tribes from Samarkand to the Pacific. I have not seen a tabulation
yet on the samples obtained from each region before hitting the wall in Alaska. This nobel effort appears to be in danger of going the way of the Human Genome Project despite all the safeguards and attempts to build good will. I will wisely leave any politically charged statements out of the discussion but I do have very strong feelings in the matter.

David.

Lowe DNA <> wrote:
David..

Just emailed you the Hap-Q's Tree and Phylogram-type diagram
with the YSEARCH Q's that have 37 markers posted.

Thanks

BIll

This thread: