GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-01 > 1294180729


From: Dienekes Pontikos <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] How old is Y-Chromosome Adam?
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 00:38:49 +0200
References: <201101040808.p0488xgP020485@mail.rootsweb.com><AA814106-788F-475B-9494-D839E21F7AC6@vizachero.com><AANLkTi=FN3NEtEsp93qpYyLSr_tD9PLJb+pRZm+HHpv7@mail.gmail.com><00e301cbac30$3bb02b80$c2482dae@Ken1><AANLkTikw0bwRedjAOMqFXGJ73jEmh-pXOuLfKQENrB77@mail.gmail.com><010e01cbac34$c3983480$c2482dae@Ken1><AANLkTimhrGmoUa=attiP4TkQxa73QJK9-vVdvoM2free@mail.gmail.com><019b01cbac57$659e0c60$c2482dae@Ken1>
In-Reply-To: <019b01cbac57$659e0c60$c2482dae@Ken1>


Ok, it will be interesting to see how you would modify the Ballantyne
et al. rates if you used the average instead of the median.
That way we can see how important the difference is, and how it varies
for markers of different mutability.

For example:

DYS436: 0 mutations in 1798 meioses,estimated at 3.84x10-4
DYS594: 1 mutation in 1635 meioses, estimated at 1.03x10-3
DYS576: 24 mutations in 1727 meioses, estimated at 1.43x10-2

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Ken Nordtvedt <> wrote:
> My message was just a response to a brief question posed by
> omeone  --- what is the basis for claim that very slow STRs have their rates
> systematically underestimated?

--
Dienekes' Anthropology Blog: http://dienekes.blogspot.com
Dodecad Ancestry Project: http://dodecad.blogspot.com


This thread: