GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-11 > 1321637952


From:
Subject: Re: [DNA] 111-Marker Mution rates
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 17:39:12 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2515.1321634856.30868.genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com>


>Sandy Patterson:

>My estimation for the sum of the mutation rates for FTDNA markers 1-111 is just over 0.41




>Anatole Klyosov:

>How come? Based on what?




>Sandy Patterson:

>It's based on observed YHRD mutation rates plus those published by Ballantyne et al 2010 and Burgarella & Vasques 2010.




My response:

 

Again???

 

I gave here a detailed analysis of their "mutation rates". Well, read again, http://aklyosov.home.comcast.net/~aklyosov/Vestnik_4_09.pdf

p. 1831 and further, particularly pp. 1834-1837. "Mutation rates" by Ballantyne et al (2010) and Burgarella and Vasques (2010) might good for something else (I frankly do not know for what, but maybe for some forensic things), but NOT for DNA genealogy.

 

>By memory, I think John Chandler's estimated rates sum to .2243 over 67 markers.... Still, I don't think .2243 is far off.


 

I do not know about "memory", however, 0.2243 for 67 marker haplotypes is a totally unacceptable value. It is 187% higher, that the proven value. In the "correct TMRCA analysis" I have noted that 39 of 67 marker Clan Donald haplotypes have 159 mutations, which resulted in 875+/-110 years to (supposed to be) Somerled: 159/39/0.12 = 34-->35 (conditional) generations, that is 875+/-110 ybp. If you apply that 0.2243, you will get that Somerled lived 159/39/0.2243 = 18 (conditional) generations, that is 450 ybp. John, Lord of the Isles (died in 1386) would have lived about 350 years ago.

 

>So I don't think .41 can be that far out.

:-))

 

It is VERY far out.



>Didier wrote
>Are those rates taking into account the back mutations ? It seems to me that in his approach A. Klyosov is first applying a rate, and then correcting for back mutations. You might both apply similar rates on the overall process. Just a thought.



Dear Didier,

 

Sorry, that thought was not the best of yours. For times of Lord John or Somerled the correction is just about 3-4%, but not 0.410/0.198 = 207%.

For E-V13 the correction is about 12%.

 

Furthermore, both approached should be corrected exactly for the same factor. This factor reflects a difference between a number of "observed" mutations and "actual" ones.

 

Regards,

 

Anatole  Klyosov

 

 

*******************************************************

 

 
The mutations rate constant for the 111 marker panel was published in Proceedings of the Russian Academy of DNA Genealogy, vol. 4, No. 7 (July 2011), p. 1535-1539, "The mutation rate constant for the 111 marker haplotype panel", by A.A. Klyosov.?Illustrations and calculations were given, among others, using a dataset and the respective haplotype tree for I1 haplogroup. The 67 marker panel (with the mutation rate constant 0.12 per haplotype, or 0.12/67 = 0.00179 per marker) gave 3625+/-385 years to a common ancestor, the 111 marker panel (with the mutation rate constant 0.198 per haplotype, or 0.198/111 = 0.00178 per marker) gave 3700 years. 

Let's verify it here, just for fun. 20 Donald Clan haplotypes (Red Group) are available in the 111 marker format. The first 67 markers have 70 mutations from the base haplotype, that is 70/20/0.12 = 29 generations (without a small correction for back mutations), all the 111 markers?add 37 mutations, resulting in 107 mutations total. 107/20/0.198 = 27 generations.? 

(By the way, somebody here was talking on a "huge error of margin") 

With your 0.41 value for the 111 markers the Donalds would have had a common ancestor only 107/20/0.41 = 13 generations ago, that is 325 years ago. Forget about John, Lord of the Isles :-)) (I am reminding again that those "generations" are conditional ones, 25 years of length, you cannot change it without a recalculation of the mutation rate constant) 

Another example. A couple of days ago I have calculated here a timespan to a common ancestor of E-V13 subclade based on 193 of 67 marker haplotypes (thank you Larry for providing the dataset). It gave 115 generations for the 25 marker panel, 117 generations for the 37 marker panel, and 123 generations for the 67 marker panel (without corrections for back mutations). 

Now, out of those 193 haplotypes 26 were determined in the 111 marker format. Let's verify the calculations. 

The first 25 markers contain 129 mutations, that is 129/26/0.046 = 108 generations
The first 37 markers contain 256 mutations, that is 256/26/0.090 = 109 generations
The first 67 markers contain 355 mutations, that is 355/26/0.120 = 114 generations
The first 111 markers contain 552 mutations, that is 552/26/0.198 = 107 generations 

One can see, that even the extreme numbers, 114 and 107 here, differ by only 6%. On average all four TMRCAs gave 109.5+/-3.1 generations, that is +/-2.8%. 


The first 111 markers contain 552 mutations, that is 552/26/0.198 = 107 generations 

One can see, that even the extreme numbers, 114 and 107 here, differ by only 6%. On average all four TMRCAs gave 109.5+/-3.1 generations, that is +/-2.8%. 


(By the way, somebody here was talking on a "huge error of margin") (By the way, somebody here was talking on a "huge error of margin")

(Somebody else was talking that he does "not believe in those calculations")


Regards,

 

Anatole Klyosov

************************************
The main (principal) branch contains 39 haplotypes, with the base haplotype as
follows:

13 25 15 11 11 14 12 12 10 14 11 31 -- 16 8 10 11 11 23 14 20 31 12 15 15
16 - 11 12 19 21 17 16 17 18 34 39 12 11 - 11 8 17 17 8 12 10 8 11 10 12 22
22 15 11 12 12 13 8 14 23 21 12 12 11 13 11 11 12 12

No wonder, it is the "modal" Donald Clan haplotype on the original list, since the
branch is the largest one. It is the same haplotype we identified earlier
with our publication (201) with Andrew MacEacharn.

Those 39 haplotypes contain 27, 64, 120, and 159 mutations in the first 12,
25, 37, and 67 marker haplotypes. This gives

27/39/0.020 = 35 --> 36 gen, or 900±195 ybp, or
64/39/0.046 = 36 --> 37 gen, or 925±150 ybp, or
120/39/0.09 = 34 --> 35 gen, or 875±120 ybp, or
159/39/0.12 = 34 --> 35 gen, or 875±110 ybp.

Please notice how all the four lines fit each other with their TMRCA. The
most reliable is, of course, the 67 marker series, and it gives 2011 minus
875 = 1136 AD. As you might remember, Somerled lived 1100-1164 AD.



This thread: