GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-05 > 1211488153


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] S21/S28 Split+m223 stuff
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 14:29:13 -0600
References: <769063.31538.qm@web86608.mail.ird.yahoo.com><003601c8bc36$10308410$6400a8c0@Ken1><0A16794D-21A8-4A8B-9B35-4032F2C536BF@vizachero.com>


Well, someone is using a maverick or renegade tool --- not mine. I don't
have the weighting expression in yet for single clade MRCA age estimates.
The weighting is just in for interclade MRCA.

Ken

----- Original Message -----
From: "Vincent Vizachero" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] S21/S28 Split+m223 stuff


> On May 22, 2008, at 2:02 PM, Ken Nordtvedt wrote:
>> I don't know of any "commonly previous thoughts" that S21 MRCA was
>> older than S28 MRCA? What gave you that impression?
>
>
> The ratio of estimated TMRCA for S21 and S28 depends on the way in
> which the markers are weighted and which markers are considered.
>
> I've copied an excerpt from Tim Janzen's post yesterday in which he
> compared the datasets using your tool and using James Heald's tool.
>
> In some cases (the 37 marker cases, for example) S21 actually looks
> slightly older than S28 using your tool but dramatically younger
> using James'.
>
>
>
> On May 21, 2008, at 8:11 PM, Tim Janzen wrote:
>
>> Project JH -M KN -M JH +M KN +M # of haplotypes # of markers
>>
>> R1b1c9 S21+ 4110 3486 4050 3539 190 12
>> R1b1c9 S21+ 4808 3465 4224 2727 180 37
>> R1b1c9 S21+ 3349 3075 3462 2431 120 67
>>
>> R1b1c10 Kerchner 6655 4001 6937 4876 62 12
>> R1b1c10 Kerchner 5928 3352 5401 2537 59 37
>> R1b1c10 Kerchner 6224 3589 5924 2850 43 67
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>


This thread: