GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1265943645


From: Robert Stafford <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Variance Assessment wrt back and parallel mutations
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:00:45 -0600
References: <mailman.4304.1265934440.2099.genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com><E5F3163D5D5047CABDDD6A54DBD2102C@anatoldesktop><59b150b1002111857h68fd7962y77d7f7b194e526a2@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <59b150b1002111857h68fd7962y77d7f7b194e526a2@mail.gmail.com>


Correct that to rate per birth or transmission event. The intergeneration
time has no bearing.

Bob Stafford

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Robert Stafford <>wrote:

> But this is not true. Rates are expressed in mutations per generation.
>
> Bob Stafford
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Anatole Klyosov <>wrote:
>
>> >From: Sasson Margaliot < >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >2) You also mention the issue of AVERAGE GENERATION TIME.
>>
>> >Mutation rates are calibrated with a certain assumption about generation
>> length, say 30 years.
>> So the "mutation rates" not literally for generation, but rather for 30
>> years. So at least for this part of your objections there is a SIMPLE
>> straightforward answer. You cannot add 20% because of this reson, because
>> it
>> was "thought through" in advance.
>>
>> (Anatole) You are correct.
>>
>>
>>
>


This thread: