Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268496929

From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: [DNA] Fw: FW: Genome workushersinnew geneticera- howcan we mine new data?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 09:15:29 -0700

I meant to say "node topology" below rather than "node typology"

And from all said, I personally would prefer the full Y genome development
at affordable cost over pushing for more STRs.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2010 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] FW: Genome work ushersinnew geneticera- howcan we mine
new data?

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sandy Paterson" <>
>> Thanks.
>> So a full genome will find much that WTY won't. That's what I was hoping
>> for.
>> I should be able to find the message - I'll have a look and post out of
>> forum.
> A full Y genome by itself, and the supporting databases of SNPs from many
> males and in a useful form for the mass of hobbyists, would render, in my
> opinion, the best of the STR haplotypes obsolete.
> I think someone's survey concluded there were about 200 potentially useful
> STRs on the Y. Let's say they maintained an average mutation rate of
> 1/300
> each. Then a full 200 STR haplotype would have an expectation of about
> 2/3
> mutations per generation.
> A full Y genome has about the same expected mutation rate per generation.
> So the time resolution of the two systems is about the same.
> The full Y genome showing one's snps, however, have the cleancut ability
> to
> resolve the time ordering (resulting in the node typology) of all the past
> mutational events cleanly, while the STR haplotypes face substantial
> statistical ambiguity on this score. This is because we reach about 1
> mutation event per generation from the two systems in quite different
> ways.
> In one case we look at a small number (200) of rather fast mutating STRs.
> In the other case we look at a huge number (25 million) of very slow
> mutating SNPs.
> So for right now, I would think the system with the best technological
> prospects for improvement at costs we can afford is of greatest personal
> interest.
> -------------------------------
> 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: