GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-01 > 1294182059


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] How old is Y-Chromosome Adam?
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 16:01:09 -0700
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><AANLkTikJRLQ3ahx+4Hvbe2m-W7stiT61ZXbVGpafQpiZ@mail.gmail.com>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Dienekes Pontikos" <>


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
I'd add (1-.69)/1798 to his number to get 5.56 10^-4 = 1/1798

DYS594: 1 mutation in 1635 meioses, estimated at 1.03x10-3
I'd get 2/1635 = 1.22 10^-3

DYS576: 24 mutations in 1727 meioses, estimated at 1.43x10-2
I'd get 25/1727 = 1.448 10^-2

The differences in each case are all of order .3 / 1700, while the
fractional differences of course diminish with increasing mutability.

I hope playing around with Ballantyne rates is just for convenient example?
Using only N=1700 or so father/son transitions in his observations, he will
have larger statistical uncertainties in estimated rates than those studies
which use about 10,000 father/son transitions. It is more difficult to
determine the true "N" for other methods.

Has someone put the Ballantyne rates up next to other rates commonly used by
people? In other words; are there any statistically significant
discrepancies? I have a few suspect STRs in mind whose quoted rates I
doubt.



This thread: