GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-05 > 1306705451


From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Surprisng Y-STR result.
Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 17:44:11 -0400
References: <000101cc1dd5$1f65b320$5e311960$@com> <014f01cc1e40$8664e080$932ea180$@dgmweb.net><BANLkTikJpyZTTzp4Cq3qdAYC90q1PHw+mA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikJpyZTTzp4Cq3qdAYC90q1PHw+mA@mail.gmail.com>


Thanks for the added example, Ann. I'm not certain whether I'm more
comforted or more discomforted to know the problem is widespread. I'm
definitely relieved, though, to find that I'm not going to have to
come up with a biological explanation for the abrupt increase in GD!

I do wish the ROSE project would display their results online, so we
ROSE researchers could see them (my paternal grandmother was a ROSE).
As it stands, you have to subscribe to the Rose Family Association
Bulletin to view results which means, at best, you're waiting months
to find out what's new.

Diana

> From: Ann Turner
>
> The ISOGG mailing list recently discussed a case in the
> Rose project of a 67/67 match that had mismatches on 27
> markers for a total genetic distance of 48 in Panel 5.
> FTDNA eventually relented and retested the samples, which
> turned out to have a total genetic distance of two. This
> resolution was reported just three days ago, so there may
> be a ripple effect if they can identify which samples were
> mixed up.
>
> Ann Turner




This thread: