Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1265836698

From: "Eldon Wade" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] News item: first ancient human genome sequenced
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:18:18 -0500
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>


I checked a few of the SNPs they tested (P280, P286, U106) and they
indicated the positions for those SNPs as being 20302477, 16225644, and
8856077 respectively. Using info I received from FTDNA while doing the WTY
project, the actual positions are one base greater than this paper is using,
i.e. 20302478, 16225645, and 8856078.
Am I reading one of the data sets wrong? If so, which one?


-----Original Message-----
[mailto:] On Behalf Of
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 2:34 PM
Subject: [DNA] News item: first ancient human genome sequenced

Yup, the whole thing (or pretty much):

It's the cover article in the February 11 issue of Nature,

Only the supplementary material appears to be freely available online

Ann Turner

To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: