Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1265169616

From: Michael Maddi <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Variance Assessment of R:U106 DYS425Null Cluster
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 20:00:16 -0800 (PST)

Ken Nordtvedt wrote:

But that 3000 years for U106 with null 435 seems somewhat younger than the
age of all of U106

My reply:

I think you meant to type null 425. That cluster is L48+ as proven by a dozen or more L48+ results for cluster members.

So the age of the cluster should be compared to L48 (downstream of U106), instead of U106. What is the estimate for the age of L48?

Mike Maddi

This thread: