GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-05 > 1211564255


From: "Tim Janzen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] S21/S28 Split+m223 stuff
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 10:37:35 -0700
In-Reply-To: <167409.30542.qm@web86610.mail.ird.yahoo.com>


Dear Alan,
Yes, I did put in quite a bit of effort to run the R1b subclade age
calculations and to create the spreadsheet. An updated version of the
spreadsheet is now available for download on my web site at
http://www.timjanzen.com/dna.html. The R1b subclade age calculations I
posted in my message two days ago come from the following output rows in the
spreadsheet:
column labeled "JH -M" comes from rows 3363, 3369, and 3375
column labeled "KN -M" comes from rows 3381, 3387, and 3393
column labeled "JH +M" comes from rows 3330, 3339, and 3345
column labeled "KN +M" comes from rows 3285, 3291, and 3297
I would like to again thank Ken Nordtvedt and James Heald for
posting information to the list about the formulas used in this spreadsheet.
I wouldn't have been able to develop the spreadsheet without their formulas.
The spreadsheet still doesn't have weighted marker values or 95% confidence
intervals. It also doesn't yet compare two sets of haplotypes like Ken's
spreadsheet at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/GenBackup.xls does. I
will add these features to my spreadsheet in the near future. Yesterday Ken
and I figured out how to iterate the generations on line 522 in his program,
so Ken will probably be putting an updated version of his program on his web
site in the near future as well.
Others should feel free to do trial runs with different datasets and
help us all work through this situation. We need to make sure that all
variables that influence the calculations are appropriately dealt with.

Sincerely,
Tim

-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Alan R
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 5:45 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [DNA] S21/S28 Split+m223 stuff

Tim. Thats looks like you put in a huge effort there. I have to say the
extraordinary efforts of people on this 'list', especially those doing the
primary calculations is deeply impressive even if we all have different
ideas about interpretations etc.

There are clearly limitations in just using within-clade MRCA and
inter-clade MRCA probably tells us much more. However the within-clade MRCA
dates at least give us a minimum date for the clade and this alone could
tell us a lot if there was only agreement on dates.

Alan

This thread: