GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1265317147
From: "Lancaster-Boon" <>
Subject: [DNA] Using partial repeats and other imperfect markers for clades?
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 21:59:07 +0100
I have mentioned this type of thing before on various forums, but my
occasion now is reading the 2007 article written by Myres et al concerning
I note that in the past, very unusual things happening at STRs have been
used as SNPs, with good results. A very short DYS388 in J for example, and
if we had no other SNP I am sure we would have used the short DYS455 to find
I am encouraged to see R1b enthusiasts trying to use the SNPs around the
DYS464X to find clades.
But on the whole, we do not see these things being inserted into places like
the ISOGG tree anymore.
For example the Myres papers found a clade, and proposed it be treated it
that way, within M405/U106/S21 (xM467/S29/U198).
Why is that?
I am mad to think we are missing a great opportunity?
And by the way, when will FT DNA start reporting partial repeats?
Personally I have been waiting a long time for FT DNA to report partial
repeats because think a lot of patterns will become clear in a stroke.
|[DNA] Using partial repeats and other imperfect markers for clades? by "Lancaster-Boon" <>|