GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266208887
From: "Anatole Klyosov" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] TMRCA assessments
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 23:41:27 -0500
>From: Robert Stafford <>
>I agree with you that back mutations are not worth discussing.
>However, parallel mutations are much more common,
>which can be shown by statistics. I would suggest that
>you address them.
I have asked here already twice -- what is so important about "parallel
mutations"? Why are they different from all other mutations, that so much
attention is paid to them? If we take, say, L21 dataset of 509 of 67-marker
haplotypes, that is 34,103 alleles, how many "parallel mutations" the tree
has? However, the dataset is perfectly the "first-order", is nicely
described, shows excellent fit between mutation-counting and base
So what is a big deal about "parallel mutations"? What are those "parallel
mutations" anyway? If they form branches - fine, so what?
|Re: [DNA] TMRCA assessments by "Anatole Klyosov" <>|