GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-09 > 1220975869


From: "David Faux" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] 9RA autosomal Native American marker
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 08:57:49 -0700
References: <BLU126-DAV8BE82C64F3E07C5644BC792540@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BLU126-DAV8BE82C64F3E07C5644BC792540@phx.gbl>


Not exactly Ray. It all hinges on how far back the Native American ancestor
was in generations. If 7 generations ago, then the ancestor had about a one
in 3 chance of inheriting that allele. With each generation it diminishes
by 50% so the likelyhood of anyone with remote minority NA ancestry having a
repeat value of 9 is vanishingly small (should I use the word
infinitesimal). Hence this marker cannot be used to assess the merits of
"demerits" of the ABDNA test. Apples to oranges really.

David K. Faux.


On 9/9/08, Raymond Whritenour <> wrote:
>
> Not really, Anders. Someone either has Native American ancestors, or they
> don't. The AncestrybyDNA BGA test purports to indicate the test-taker's
> likelihood of having such ancestry. A D9S919 9RA marker actually tells the
> test-taker that he or she *does* have NA ancestry (after ruling out
> "Beringian" ancestry). People with NA ancestry should test positive for
> that ancestry, by whatever tests are devised. In a group of 100 people
> whose average result is 10% NA, by the BGA test, about 3 of them *should*
> test positive for the 9RA marker. If this does not happen, then the value
> of BGA tests could be called seriously into question. Of course, if this
> *does* happen, then one might have more confidence in finding some value in
> the BGA tests.
>
> Ray Whritenour
>

This thread: