GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2001-01 > 0979167089


From: "diane maestas" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re: GENEALOGY-DNA-D Digest V01 #2
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 14:51:29 -0800
References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010108215750.027e3ec0@firstnethou.com> <3A5B60E6.2858E91A@genetree.com>


can i ask a question of dna what would it mean if i had a blood my son has a
blood what would the fathers blood type have to be in order to be his blood.
my mother has ab blood and my dad had o blood. the fathers in question have
b blood and one thinks he may have a or o ,..... sign diane maestas also
does anyone here heard of recombiant 8 in the gene and how does that affect
the sign diane maestas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Terrence Carmichael" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re: GENEALOGY-DNA-D Digest V01 #2


> Hi Bennett:
>
> The number of repeats at a specific y-chromosome loci is the most
'efficient'
> format to achieve a standardized representation of results from an STR
> analysis. This is because it offers a tangible measurement that is
repeatable.
> Does anybody dispute this?? Actually, sequence data would be better, but
is
> hard to get good sequences in these repeated regions. Therefore, it is
more
> expensive and laborious to obtain. DNA laboratories have used the number
of
> repeats in a STRs as a standard for years to determine biological
relationships
> such as paternity, siblingship, and matching identities in the case of
forensic
> testing. Just because there is no commercially available kit that will
easy the
> analysis of the y-chromosome, and allow for increased reproducibility,
does not
> mean that we should ignore providing the data in the most standardized and
> tangible format possible. I believe that it is important that researchers,
such
> as genealogists, get data from their tests that they can use in papers
that
> they may publish. Then others can compare their data many years form now,
and
> etc. Maybe I am wrong.
>
> Terry
>
>
> Bcg wrote:
>
> > Hi All
> >
> > Some questions have arisen lately about the non-standard nature of the
> > alleles reported by Family Tree DNA . I appreciate these questions as
they
> > give me an opportunity to answer the questions and provoke, I'm sure, a
> > lively round of exchanges which will be to the betterment of us all.
> >
> > Our studies reporting of the allele results is somewhat non--standard.
In
> > fact there is no standard for Y chromosome testing, which I expect is
some
> > years away. Let me explain it this way:
> >
> > On the female side, a Standard was set about 20 years ago. It is
variously
> > known as either the Anderson Sequence, or more commonly know as the
> > Cambridge Reference Sequence. That standard is tested by people all
> > over, and used for crime labs, genealogy, medical testing, etc.
> >
> > There is no standard in testing the Y chromosome, the research is just
too
> > new, and scientists are testing today the very locations on the Y
> > chromosomes that will produce the Cambridge Standard of the future.
Until
> > all the useful Y chromosomes are discovered, quantified and accepted as
a
> > standard, the issue will NOT be comparisons between labs due to a
numbering
> > mechanism, but rather between labs at all, in any practical sense.
> >
> > Our company has previously released the DYS #'s for the 6 markers (of
our
> > 12) that have been placed in the public domain by Dr. Hammer or
> > others. The rest of our alleles will be released as further articles
are
> > published that use them, with the intent being to release all current
Loci
> > as we add new markers being researched now.
> >
> > Quite frankly let me posse a few questions... Given that the scientific
> > world is publish or perish, would you not agree that labs doing nascent
> > technological research would consider their in-house discovered loci to
> > have some, perhaps great, value?
> >
> > If so, can we smartly assume that Loci freely released for genetic
testing,
> > before they have been "properly promoted" by the University lab, has
> > "great" or even "significant" value to science or its researchers? Or
is
> > the marker just another location on the Y with little or no diversity?
> >
> > When someone is tested on the Y by Family Tree DNA we currently compare
you
> > with our database of Western Europeans...we are willing to release the
> > repeat information for the 6 loci mentioned above to any customer who
asks
> > so they can access the ethnic calculator at:
> >
> > https://www.agenus.com/ClassA/ClassB/ychrome.cfm
> >
> > Given the above , do you want to have a certificate that reads,
> > and/or talk to potential relatives by using a string of 1 digit or 2
digit
> > numbers. 4, 7, 5, 8, 5 or 12, 21, 12, 16, 12. That's about as non
> > standard as we are. To be clear our numbers are reported on a scale to
> > allow us to test your Loci with the newest markers available. When the
> > opportunity presents itself for us to have top notch research and those
> > alleles in the public domain we will freely provide the crossover table
to
> > allow all who have tested with us to access any Y calculator on the
> > market. Until them we will continue to offer the tightest commercially
> > available Y Chromosome test on the market and the genealogical
comparison
> > that our test offers.
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Bennett Greenspan
> > President
> > http://www.FamilyTreeDNA.com
> >
> > The World's only website dedicated to Genealogy by Genetics
> >
> > ==============================
> > Search over 900 million names at Ancestry.com!
> > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp
>
>
>
>
>
> ==============================
> Ancestry.com Genealogical Databases
> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist2.asp
> Search over 2500 databases with one easy query!
>

This thread: