Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1265825710

From: Vincent Vizachero <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] MRCA Estimates
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 13:15:10 -0500
References: <4B02064423F54F2889C553CF681379FA@ibm5ye12amji2d>
In-Reply-To: <4B02064423F54F2889C553CF681379FA@ibm5ye12amji2d>


I think a more informed approach would be to acknowledge that TMRCA
estimates are imprecise (as opposed to being inaccurate, which they
shouldn't be). That doesn't make them misleading, necessarily.

For example, if you had a pair of men whose paper trail says "fifth
cousin" but there GD was 22 with 46 markers tested then the only
conclusion is that the pedigree is "misleading" not the DNA.

A robust understanding of the dynamics would result in no one being
surprised that a father/son pair had a greater GD than a pair of
second cousins. In fact, such situations occur regularly.


On Feb 10, 2010, at 12:52 PM, Charles Acree wrote:

> However, as we all know, MRCA predictions can often mislead when
> applied to the genealogical time-frame (roughly the past millennium).

This thread: