GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-11 > 1320596766

From: <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Any feedback on the RCC method of TMRCA estimates?
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 16:26:06 -0000
References: <CAKWx04Ts9vKT4W9nGpPvNMUNyXo-dXfeE89XRGgoO78GdioCOg@mail.gmail.com><744DB3B023EF47698340D9AB3082068B@bobPC> <000001cc9c57\$c5d748d0\$5185da70\$@com><E72CEFB533DD46AC87DAAC1EF897B4E9@bobPC><002101cc9c78\$f3d346a0\$db79d3e0\$@com>

Thanks for explaining that Sandy.
I didn't see the recent paper.
I read the two earlier papers and got the concept of pairwise mismatches
between haplotypes
using correlation coefficients across the markers, instead of using using
the usual absolute GD.

Bob Bootle

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandy Paterson" <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Any feedback on the RCC method of TMRCA estimates?

> If you know how to calculate a correlation coefficient from first
> principles
> you'll find that
> what the paper does is the following :
>
> Take two 37-marker haplotypes.
> Calculate the correlation coefficient using excel, but pretend that
> of 2 people with 37 attributes, you have 37 people with 2 attributes.
> Take the reciprocal of the 'correlation coeficient' so calculated.
> Subtract 1.
> Multiply by 10,000.
>
> That's the RCC.
>
> Sandy
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> [mailto:] On Behalf Of
>
> Sent: 06 November 2011 09:37
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Any feedback on the RCC method of TMRCA estimates?
>
> I used the MS Excel 2010 Correlation Coeficient function.
>
> RCC is 10000 *(1 - Correlation Coefficient)
>
> Bob bootle
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> 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