GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives
Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-05 > 1211038039
From: Beth Long <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Some truth in article was Re: Answer fromAncestorsMagazine
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 08:27:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7kincaids%40primus.ca$142.154.19.142$.8C66D00E99B3486E8E26FA265A05CA4E@PeterAKincaiPC>
Peter,
As I commented, 12 markers serves to exclude (so we have spent "only" $99). It identifies those people for whom it is worthwhile to upgrade.
If 25 markers had been the entry level, believe me: there would be no Bukovina Hungarian project. Most of our test subjects are in Hungary and Romania, and do not pay for their testing (it has all been done thanks to contributions from a small number of North American descendants). I have been able to get contributions mainly since $99 seems reasonable to many people.
Because of the relatively low cost of the 12-marker test, I am also able to do "field trips" to Transylvania to find and test individuals based only on the surname (this is because the MRCA would be before the existance of church records). So far, we have had nine "hits" using this method, which have then been followed up with upgrade to 25 or 37.
We have an 80,000+ person database of people from the five Hungarian villages of Bukovina, spanning about ten generations. We use the 12-marker test to check presumed distant cousins. If they match, we upgrade. If not, we start testing "up the line" until we find where the disconnect occurred.
As I mentioned, only a minority of our test subjects are R1b. The 12-marker test has been spot-on for identifying J2, G, Q, R1a, and I matches at the 12-marker level. None failed to be confirmed by upgrades.
I guess I'm wondering what's wrong with the existance of a test which has value for many people, though it may not for your own project?
Beth
"Peter A. Kincaid" <> wrote:
Why would you need to upgrade if there was
value in the 12 marker results?
This thread: