GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2009-06 > 1244873826


From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Are all of the old R1b1b2 modals of any value any more?
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 02:17:06 -0400
References: <5cf61dfb0906120615i1bb92fafx1eb4fdccd0a29ce@mail.gmail.com><F61B1D31-8EA8-4EC8-95BE-CFB984163700@vizachero.com>
In-Reply-To: <F61B1D31-8EA8-4EC8-95BE-CFB984163700@vizachero.com>


I've never tried to use modal haplotypes to "predict" anything, but they
certainly have other uses. This page at my web site is a sample of how I use
modal haplotypes in my Y-DNA surname projects:
http://dgmweb.net/genealogy/DNA/SignatureMarkers.shtml

So, yes, I wish those who have posted modal haplotypes to Ysearch would keep
them up to date (including sample size and data source) and add new ones as new
subclades are defined. They may be of no great theoretical importance, but they
certainly are of practical use.

Diana

> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Vincent Vizachero
> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 9:36 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Are all of the old R1b1b2 modals of any
> value any more?
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2009, at 9:15 AM, Michael Walsh wrote:
>
> > Do the old modals need to be redone to be sub-clade "pure"?
>
> I think the more useful development would be for people to
> get away from the idea of modal haplotypes having any
> predictive utility within R1b1b2. Most so-called "clusters"
> that people refer to are not really anything of the sort, and
> I believe lead people to seeing associations that just aren't
> supported empirically.
>
> VV
>

This thread: