GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-08 > 1186256472


From: Vincent Vizachero <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Journal article: DYS458 (Underhill and SMGF)
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 15:41:12 -0400
References: <C0284B56-9EA2-4464-91FC-5B057D6355F1@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <C0284B56-9EA2-4464-91FC-5B057D6355F1@comcast.net>


No, the authors have rediscovered (for the second time) S21 and S29.

No one without a subclade before has one now, except that the partial
repeat at DYS458 is phylogenetically useful.

Vince


On Aug 4, 2007, at 2:42 PM, Sam Vass wrote:

> Help me understand. Are the authors suggesting several new subclades
> including an R1b1c that incorporates some or all of the current
> R1b1c*?
>
> Sam Vass, C27F2 at ysearch
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
> in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: