GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268599353


From: "Lancaster-Boon" <>
Subject: [DNA] Are the testing companies being guided to invest in thewrongthings for Genealogy?
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 21:42:33 +0100


Hi Terry

Another sub-section to the discussion topic "what can we do more of and
better with Y DNA" opens up with this posting!

On the subject of fast versus slow, I think it is worth pointing out that
what we call fast is often just "complex". Depending upon how you define it,
DYS464 for example does not necessarily mutate more often than many other
markers, but it can mutate in more ways, which are harder to interpret.

In this respect this raises the old question of partial repeat reporting, as
well as the repoting of the mini SNPs associated with DYS464, DYF399 etc.

These are extremely messy for TMRCA calculations and for IT, but they could
be extremely useful for genealogy.

Best Regards
Andrew

-------
From: "Terry Barton" <>
Subject: [DNA] Are the testing companies being guided to invest in thewrong
things for Genealogy?
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 12:08:18 -0400
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>

I've been thinking about the idea of looking at "slow" markers to evaluate
shared ancestry - even back "1000" years as some of the big geographic
projects are working on, while using "fast" markers for evaluating
"branching" within the geentic family.


This thread: