GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-01 > 1168706844
Subject: Re: [DNA] DYF371 and DYF408
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 16:47:24 +0000
I don't think there's any significance to the difference in reporting order.
Although the 188-188-x-y format looks odd it's technically correct as the
invariant segments are shorter than the variable ones. If Thomas had
converted the length into a pseudo-repeat count I think they would have come
out as 2.1 i.e. two repeats and one spare base, but the actual sequence is
more complicated than that (there are extra non-repeating bases instead of
the STR and a couple of deletions elsewhere to offset them).
Although their length is invariant, any major deletions/duplications in P1
will change the *number* of 188 base copies present.
Anyone with a deletion which reduces their DYS464 count from 4 to 2 should
also have lost one of the 188s. Likewise extra copies of DYS464 should be
accompanied by extra 188s at DYF408. DYF408 is therefore useful in
distinguishing different sorts of recombinational effects in P1/P2 as well
as in P5. The proportion of entries in Ymatch with missing or extra copies
is not representative because people with unusual results on the standard
markers are more likely to have ordered the extra palindromic markers.
From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
> I had noticed last night that this haplotype had the DYS408 result recorded
> as 9-9-188-188 in Ymatch, while every other entry in the database had the
> "188" arms listed first. Is there any significance to this? I see that you
> reversed the order above.
> Ymatch shows a good number of results at DYF408 with just one "188". How is
> one lost?