GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-06 > 1213567064


From: "Tim Janzen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] How could we tell?
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 14:57:44 -0700
In-Reply-To: <E01D8DDC-3B4D-4AFB-8FA1-9BC14236662A@verizon.net>


Dear Bill,
It would be helpful if you would point out the two pedigrees in the
SMGF Y chromosome or mtDNA database that don't match the test results so
that we can take a look at this situation. I have a good working
relationship with Anna Swayne at the SMGF who you mention below. I don't
believe that she or anyone else in the SMGF is purposely trying to keep DNA
results from anyone incorrectly linked to the wrong pedigree chart.
I would also like to say that it is possible that the DNA sample
that was sent to the SMGF could have been contaminated by someone else's DNA
or that two people inadvertently used the collection bottles from the other
person's SMGF kit, which would have resulted in the samples having been
switched. I think it is more likely that two people giving samples would
have inadvertently switched their collection bottles than that the SMGF
would have switched their samples once they arrived at the lab.
The Mennonite project now has 1100 DNA samples at the SMGF. We
aren't seeing any pattern of problems with the test results. We have noted
a few paternal (Y chromosome) lineage NPEs and at least one NPE on a
maternal (mtDNA) lineage, but I suspect that the lab results in these
situations are accurate. We are trying to pin down where the NPEs occurred.
Sincerely,
Tim Janzen
www.mennonitedna.com


> Bill Howard <> wrote:
> Just a short note about my experience at SMGF - I sent in 10 samples
> in August 2005 and the results were not posted for more than a year.
> Some, but not all could later be identified on their web site.
> However, they made bad mistakes on two of the samples, due, I think,
> to sample switches, and I made many phone calls to people named
> Angela, Anna, and Karen. The pedigree did not match the relationships
> indicated by the test. My phone calls were taken with courtesy and I
> was told to wait. I waited and waited and waited. More phone
> calls...... nothing done although I told them exactly what was wrong
> and they all promised to look into it. Yes, I could have paid money to
> get the results, but if the samples had been switched, it would not
> have done any good.
> That's a 20% error rate in my book.
> - Bye from Bill Howard
>

This thread: