GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1269909068


From: William Hurst <>
Subject: [DNA] PhyloTree: was RE: Homo sp. Altai complete mitochondrialgenome sequence from Denisova, Altai Russia
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:36:35 -0400
References: <E03FFA4C00A847908AEB29A611FB6BC8@IanPC>,<8cc54ef81003291150y51a19b3n848020fc57e68f30@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8cc54ef81003291150y51a19b3n848020fc57e68f30@mail.gmail.com>


Hi Vince and all,

> I would assume the recent Phylotree Build 8 update goes along with the
> article recently listed on PubMed:
>
> Letter: Mannis van Oven
>
> "Revision of the mtDNA tree and corresponding haplogroup
> nomenclature", PNAS 2010
> 107 (11) E38-E39; doi:10.1073/pnas.0915120107
>
> http://www.pnas.org/content/107/11/E38.long
>
>
> Does this constitute "published literature" status for the new haplogroup
> designations? Can I officially call myself U5a1a1 now?
>
> Vince T.

I think the Letter was dealing with some specific haplogroups or subclades published by Zhao, not with the whole PhyloTree. Also, it is a Letter, not a peer-reviewed article.

So I don't think this Letter gets FTDNA any closer to using the PhyloTree as a source for subclade designations.

To a certain extent, there are no "official" mtDNA subclade designations. But since FTDNA is doing virtually all the commercial FGS testing, what they use is "official" for us. However, when I explain new FGS results to my project members, I do tell them what the PhyloTree calls them.

Bill Hurst



This thread: