GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-06 > 1213576246


From: Martin Potter <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] How could we tell?
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 20:30:46 -0400
References: <061520080208.18841.485479A20009D9070000499922070206530A980E9C020A9B9C9D0705@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <061520080208.18841.485479A20009D9070000499922070206530A980E9C020A9B9C9D0705@comcast.net>


Kirsten,
Yes, the rate probably varies widely in small samples. While Diana's
sample size of 78 might not be "very small", it might still not be
large enough to exhibit well-behaved statistics. Then, too, there are
all the social, economic and historical factors that might not average
out to produce the expected "2-5%" per generation in particular
circumstances, regardless of sample size.
... Martin


wrote:
> I have heard 1-2% per generation. If that is right, then the 8% figure is probably low, but of course I don't know how many generations are involved in these genealogies. That 1-2% rate probably varies a lot.
>
> Kirsten
>
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: Martin Potter <>
>> Diana wrote :
>>> I haven't run into any lab errors, that I know of. But my NPE rate is running
>>> nearly eight percent (six out of 78 subjects).
>>>
>> Thanks, Diana. Eight percent! Wow. It sounds high but I don't
>> dispute your finding. I had been led to expect "2-5%" but clearly I
>> will have to be prepared for a higher rate. Forewarned is forearmed.
>> ... Martin
>>
>>


This thread: