GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-07 > 1183292008


From: "Joe Knapp" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Help please with marker 458
Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 08:13:28 -0400
References: <a81622ac0706291814v778c80ccl9882806072865762@mail.gmail.com><BAEKIPDCJKIGDOPBOCPBAELMCPAA.r.bootle@btinternet.com>
In-Reply-To: <BAEKIPDCJKIGDOPBOCPBAELMCPAA.r.bootle@btinternet.com>


On 7/1/07, Bob Bootle <> wrote:
> Would you kindly assist my education by either, listing the mutation
> rate used on each of the 37 markers, so that I may make a comparison
> with the diversity of the results in your table;
> or perhaps give me a sentence that will put me right on this.

Hi Bob,

I can't say that I know exactly what the relationship between the
mutation rate and diversity is, so I'm very interested to see if
somehow John Chandler's method can disentangle the data. Generally I'd
expect that the higher the mutation rate, the more spread there'd be
*on average* in the STR histogram for a marker, but that wouldn't
necessarily be the case due to random genetic drift. I have seen this
in my simulations--sometimes there is very little spread in a
histogram even for a marker with a high mutation rate, just luck of
the draw with genetic drift and genetic linkage of markers going along
for the ride. In simulations haplotypes and haplogroups come and go
and my gut feeling is that these factors will upset models such as
Chandler's, but who knows.

I don't know if you saw it, but in a previous message I posted link to
the results of another simulation where the mutation rate ranged from
0.002-0.0056 linearly from marker 1 to marker 37, so that's an easier
case to illustrate the effect:

http://coolohio.com/dna/hapsim/10k

http://coolohio.com/dna/hapsim/50k

Thanks for the interest!

Joe

This thread: