GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2009-07 > 1247934340
From: Al Aburto <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Fw: For Age Estimates beware of tossing STRs away
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 09:27:30 -0700
Thank you. It is interesting (your 0.00048 rate) and despite being
lower than Zhivotovsky's rate it does fall within his standard deviation
range. Zhivotovsky et al (2004) indicates an average mutation rate of
0.00069 +/- 0.00057 (quite large relative sigma I'd say) which ranges
from 0.00012 to 0.00126 mutations per generation, so your 0.00048 value
falls comfortably within ...
> Tim Janzen wrote:
> Dear Al,
> The sum of the mutation rates for the 24 markers in my "24 slow"
> option is .00961. The average mutation rate for these 24 markers is thus
> .0004. I am using 30 years per generation, however. That effectively
> increases the average mutation rate to .00048 if I were to use 25 years per
> generation, which is still significantly slower than Zhivotovsky's effective
> mutation rate.
> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:] On Behalf Of Al Aburto
> Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 7:51 AM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Fw: For Age Estimates beware of tossing STRs away
> Zhivotovsky's effective mutation rate seems to work fairly well too in
> fitting archaeological time periods. That is why it continues to be
> used ... Perhaps there is a real valid reason to suppose that the
> mutation rates used for population groups is different from that derived
> from pedigree studies? I wonder what Tim's average mutation rate is for
> his slow marker set? How much does it differ from Zhivotovsky's 0.00069
> "effective" average mutations per generation (at 25 years per generation)?
|Re: [DNA] Fw: For Age Estimates beware of tossing STRs away by Al Aburto <>|