Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268338759

From: "bbailey.lowedna" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re : Genographic Project
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:19:19 -0600
References: <> <> <> <00e201cac145$82fec7c0$5e82af48@Ken1><>
In-Reply-To: <>

Then GENOGRAPHIC PROJECT under Wells was an important concept; however,
testing on 12 markers
yielded only valuable inferences on possible ancestral haplogroups.

However, 12 markers did little else for the genealogical community. More
should have been tested. A shortfall of the project.

FTDNA with more markers (and SNPs) tested from their customers has been able
to continue
defining more and more subclades.

Problem is that most of the FTDNA customers are from folks in populations
with expendable incomes.
And not from isolated and remote populations.


-----Original Message-----
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Robert Stafford
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re : Genographic Project

The Public Participation Project was initially just a money-raiser for the
Genographic Legacy Fund (and other projects) . The Indigenous Project itself
was already fully funded. They later decided to ask some questions about
origins, so that they could use the database for migration studies. I have
not really followed the project in the last few years, so I don't know what
they are currently doing with it.

Bob Stafford

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Ken Nordtvedt

> It remains to be seen if any quality analysis can be made of such
> mini-haplotypes.
> This project by not doing state of the art investigation risks by its
> existence reducing chances that a quality projecty of that kind and goals
> will take place now any time soon.

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: