GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266632531


From: "Tom Gull" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] TMRCA of R1b1b2s to King Tut?
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 21:22:11 -0500
References: <mailman.5787.1266597968.2099.genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com><7B3ED479CB324BD7925ACA7EB65A99C7@anatoldesktop>
In-Reply-To: <7B3ED479CB324BD7925ACA7EB65A99C7@anatoldesktop>


I'm asking a question, not providing an answer. The question is based on
memories that the estimates I've seen for the TMRCAs for U152 and U106 to
their mutual parent a while back were only a few hundred years apart and the
confidence levels overlapped. Whether that mutual age was 500 years ago or
5000 years ago is not a factor with my question nor is there any need for me
to provide an estimate because I'm not proposing an hypothesis, I'm
wondering why other people settled on one particular one when a number of
similar hypotheses seem equally probable. / Tom

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Anatole Klyosov" <>
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 8:30 PM
To: <>
Cc: "Anatole Klyosov" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] TMRCA of R1b1b2s to King Tut?

>>From: Tom Gull <>
>>Isn't there some wishful thinking going on here <g>. Don't the various
>>SNPs for U152 and U106 and the like fall so much into the same timeframe
>>that we could sub any of the others in for U152 and be equally likely to
>>have a hit? And don't we also know that it's very hard to guess which of
>>these SNP someone has based on STRs alone? / Tom
>
>
> Dear Tom,
>
> It would be MUCH more productive if you present here YOUR estimate. Air
> vibration does not provide much help.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Anatole
>
> *********************************
>
>> Dear John,
>> I think Anatole's estimate for R-U152 is pretty close to the true
>> TMRCA. I just did an intraclade TMRCA estimate using 87 67-marker R-U152
>> haplotypes and got 3650 using 50 markers and John Chandler's mutation
>> rates
>> and 3552 using 10 YHRD markers and using YHRD mutation rates. As I have
>> mentioned previously intraclade TMRCA estimates tend to underestimate the
>> true TMRCA by some percentage.
>> Sincerely,
>> Tim Janzen
>
> **********************************
>>
>> >What is the latest age estimate for U152?
>>
>> My response:
>>
>> JoGG, 5(2) 217-256 (2009)
>>
>> R-U152, 184 haplotypes, TMRCA 4125+/-450 years before present.
>>
>> Anatole Klyosov
>>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> 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: