Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-01 > 1294606637

From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] How many realistic locations on the Y for SNPs?9
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2011 13:57:17 -0700
References: <CCC150916E8E4411AFE12370BBEEE726@PC><001f01cbaeb0$4c9bff00$c2482dae@Ken1><><002201cbaef0$22bda8b0$c2482dae@Ken1><><><><> <><00bb01cbb02a$4fdd76a0$c2482dae@Ken1><027801cbb03d$f2c93f80$d85bbe80$@org>

No, nothing is wrong with the calculation. How many more flip flops did you

What's the nature of SRY10831? What's its mutation rate?

By now people ought to have a suspicion that if surrogate ueps have a span
of different mutation rates, the faster mutating ones have probably had a
better chance of being found within a quite restricted number of
opportunities, given the past hit or miss way of looking for them.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawrence Mayka" <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] How many realistic locations on the Y for SNPs?9

> In the first few hundred SNPs reported in the literature, we found an
> apparent flip-flop at SRY10831.
> Is something drastically wrong with your calculation?
> Was R1a a major miracle?
> Have we rooted the haplotree in the wrong place?
>> From: [mailto:genealogy-dna-
>> ] On Behalf Of Ken Nordtvedt
>> But I am not sure how this estimate would relate to the tiny, tiny
> fraction
>> of the 25 million snps which we follow today, regardless of which
> haplogroup
>> we are working in?
> -------------------------------
> 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: