GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

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: <e4dd.3fa9ee07.38a46414@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <e4dd.3fa9ee07.38a46414@aol.com>


Ann,

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?

Eldon


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

Yup, the whole thing (or pretty much):

http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57140/

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

http://www.nature.com/nature/

Only the supplementary material appears to be freely available online

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v463/n7282/extref/nature08835-s1.pdf

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: