GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-05 > 1211035355


From: "Peter A. Kincaid" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Some truth in article was Re: Answer fromAncestorsMagazine
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 11:42:35 -0300
References: <170684.52703.qm@web90401.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <170684.52703.qm@web90401.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


Well I doubt it if you had the experience that most
other group project managers have had. Many
in our project match at 12, and 25 markers and it
is only after 37 markers that some of these expand
out to reveal the different lines. How can you say
that you identified those descended from an immigrant
ancestor (the term implies a person who immigrated
to the New World in the last 400 years) with 12
markers? Have you expanded all of them out to
show they remain close? We have had distinctly
different immigrant lines only one or two mutations
apart after 67 markers. One can not say whether
the ancestor for these two lines was their father or
a gag grandfather.

Further selective testing of a couple of markers does
not give you any further conclusive result because
you are projecting your preconceived notions on the
results. The ones you passed over could reveal
mutations marking new distinct lines you were not
previously aware of.

I found 12 markers of no help in recruiting. If someone
comes on board at 12 they are not likely to expand
further because cost was the issue. So you end up
with tease results which, in a number of cases in our
project, others will have to pay to upgrade to get any
value from. I can see the benefit to ETNA but I
stand stand by my notion that 12 marker tests are a
complete waste for genealogical purposes. There is
just too much of a risk of false positives.

Peter

P.S. Remember that genealogical value is, for the
most part, different from anthropological value.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Vick" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Some truth in article was Re: Answer from
AncestorsMagazine


> Actually, the 12-marker test is very useful for our haplogroup Q1’s in our
> VICK project. It is far from a "complete waste." We have no trouble
> identifying descendants of our immigrant ancestor with 12-markers, and the
> price makes it easier to recruit participants. After the 12-marker test,
> it is very affordable to test one or two additional markers at the Houston
> lab to nail down second and third generation lines for some of our
> participants. Those one or two markers often aren’t in the 25 or 37 marker
> panels (e.g. DYS452, GATA-A10, DYS481 and DYS436).
>
> One size doesn't fit all, but it is nice to have the choice of a 12-marker
> test if you aren’t in a common haplogroup. Bennett Greenspan told me that
> he still offers the 12-marker test because of projects like ours.
>
> Regards,
>
> Larry
>
> YCC2008 Y-DNA Haplogroup Q1b (P36.2+; M378+)
> Full Sequence mtDNA Haplogroup H2a2
>
> Ysearch & mitosearch: XXGV9
> Ymatch: jlvick
> Facebook: James Larry Vick
>
> Guild of One-Name Studies Member
> 4679http://www.one-name.org/profiles/vick.html
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Peter A. Kincaid <>
> Subject: [DNA] Some truth in article was Re: Answer from Ancestors
> Magazine
>
> It is a complete waste:
>
> 2) for companies to offer low resolution tests (FTDNA
> knows their 12 marker test is pretty useless but
> they still sell it).

This thread: