GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-03 > 1172780473


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Challenge to YDNA J Gurus
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 13:21:13 -0700
References: <BAY122-F99127D9D2B9CBEF039D6EDA800@phx.gbl>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jackson Montgomery-Devoni" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Challenge to YDNA J Gurus


>
> No I am not saying that any 43 marker modal haplotypes have yet been
> determined in haplogroup J. I was just wondering if 43 marker haplotypes
> should also be included as they also have some insightful markers in them
> and they are also a large panel of markers.


Yes, the several markers in the SMGF-based haplotypes which are not part of
FTDNA's 67 markers can be added in --- B7, A10, C4, 461,462,463, 441, 445 I
think covers the list. Some of these are slow mutators, so it enlarges the
pool of slow markers from which to select one's set of included markers for
defining the modal haplotypes.

But the rest of the 43 markers from SMGF-connected companies are also
present in the 67 from FTDNA.

Actually, I am doing exactly what you suggest for my haplogroup I founders'
tree stuff. And I am going to use a "hands-off" criterion for selecting my
slow markers. I will list them all (from both FTDNA and SMGF sets) in order
by mutation rate and pick so many from the slow end of the list without
allowing any other criteria. I think I may have let some bias in my
original selection of 30 markers.

Ken


This thread: