GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-04 > 1175540971


From: (John Chandler)
Subject: Re: [DNA] A New N. Euro R1b1c Haplotype Cluster ???
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 15:09:31 -0400 (EDT)
References: <009201c773cc$8d5e0420$6501a8c0@Richard><REME20070331191642@alum.mit.edu><001201c77466$4848b840$6501a8c0@Richard>
In-Reply-To: <001201c77466$4848b840$6501a8c0@Richard> (rigastev@cox.net)


Rich wrote:
> So, what does this do to my cluster (if cluster it is)?
>
> Does it invalidate it? Or does it mean that 385 is not reliable or stable
> enough to use as one of its key indicators?

The point I raised was that DYS385=11,11 is not nearly so far
off-modal as a 3-step offset would be in a single-copy marker, plus
the worry that a 25-marker assessment would be less reliable than a
37-marker one.

> The members of the cluster also share all or most of the same off-modal
> values at 390, 439, 458, 447, 449, 456, and 576. Should we include those who
> share those values but who have 11, 14 at 385?

As others have pointed out, slower markers are a better signpost for a
cluster than faster markers. Although DYS385 is not one of the very
fastest markers, DYS439, DYS458, DYS449, DYS456, and DYS576 *are*. If
you let go of DYS385, there's not much confidence left in the clustering.

John Chandler

This thread: