GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-04 > 1050964268


From: Charles <>
Subject: Re: FW: [DNA] DNAPrint Test: Validation Studies
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 18:32:32 -0400
References: <NGBBJJHDALCHOBFBBMPICELHCJAA.tfrudakis@dnaprint.com>


Tony,

Just curious, why would you not have picked the PA Germans, aka the PA
Dutch. I don't think anyone prior to your DNAPrint test would have
surmised that some of us may be harboring ancient "East" Asian content,
such as for my test and for Zach's wife. Going into your DNAPrint test I
think most PA Germans would think they were 100% European. What advance
knowledge did you have which would rule out the PA Germans, aka PA
Dutch.

Also, again, do you consider Mongolia, which is north of and abuts
China, as East Asian for your definition of your East Asian population
group. It seems logical to me that Mongolia would be included. It
certainly would make sense as to how "East" Asian genetic content got
into Europe. It certainly didn't get there in large numbers via modern
Chinese, Korean, or Japanese immigration such that it would show up in
the PA German stock. I think they definitely should be included. As you
know, I have suggested changing the graphic map for the Group
delineations. You said you were going to look into in one email. I just
wanted to see if you agree with those points. If Cambodia and Vietnam
are in then I think definitely Mongolia should be too. And according to
the reference source I found the other day, Mongolia is defined as part
of East Asia.

Charles


TONY N FRUDAKIS wrote:
>
> Charles,
>
> You are correct in my view - the test is reaching farther back than you are
> interested to learn about, but the 3.0 version is expected to be able to
> provide you the information you seek. In the future, we will advertise the
> 3.0 version as the test of choice for genealogical aims, and the 2.0 test
> as a journey farther back in time than 3.0 for those with more deep
> anthropological interests. Nonetheless, you have to admit, you learned
> something about your tree that I bet you didnt know before, even if it is
> not exactly what you were seeking to learn...
>
> It would indeed be interesting to see how a collection of PA Dutch type on a
> population level scale. For what it is worth, the Europeans we used as a
> parental group came from PA - a collection of "white" students at PSU (as I
> mentioned previously, about half of Europeans tested are 100% pure
> IndoEuropean, and admixture within this parental group would balance out, so
> there is no bias expected towards or away from any one type of admixture).
> For example, we would not have used PA Dutch as a parental group of fear
> that a certain type of admixture may be systematic within this group, as it
> appears is possible from your and other results recently.
>
> Ill be monitoring, but to be honest the volume of emails clogs my system
> making it difficult for me to conduct day to day business. I may assign the
> monitoring to someone else here, and respond from time to time to certain
> posts... but Ill keep going as currently for a couple days more at least.
>
> Tony Frudakis, Ph.D.
> DNAPrint genomics, Inc.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles [mailto:]
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 4:19 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: FW: [DNA] DNAPrint Test: Validation Studies
>
> Tony,
>
> If my 21% East Asian admixture as reported by my DNAPrint test results
> is indeed accurate, then in my case, it must be picking it up East Asian
> AIM's in my genome from fairly old sources, say significantly beyond
> more than 500 years ago, and it must be fairly widespread within the PA
> German people, at least in my area where all my PA German ancestors for
> the last 250 years lived roughly within 25 miles of each other. My 30
> years of genealogical research into my PA German lineage, and that of
> others in this area, pretty much reaches a dead-end, once you cross the
> big pond to Europe, on most lines about 500 years ago. The records are
> just not there in Europe on most of my lines prior to 1500, and for
> people in my area. The records in this area for significant numbers of
> PA Germans in my area start about 1740. The much older sources for the
> East Asian AIMs may be of anthropological interest but are not of much
> use to me for genealogical purposes.
>
> I am still trying to get more so-called "pure-blooded PA Germans by self
> designation" tested to see if a significant East Asian content exists in
> most PA Germans in this area, near the county line border of Lehigh and
> Berks Counties, PA. Here is my picture so you can see my phenotype,
> clearly Caucasian European.
>
> http://www.kerchner.com/cfk.htm
>
> I look forward to hearing more about your version 3.0 test. How much
> more of a recent time frame will those AIM markers target to evaluate?
> Will it be more useful for genealogical work?
>
> Also, Tony, please don't leave the list in the future as you mentioned.
> At least stay and monitor it if your are just too busy to respond.
>
> Charles
>
> TONY N FRUDAKIS wrote:
> >
> > OK, I cannot send the file as an attachment. If anyone wants to see the
> > file described below, please email me at and Ill
> send
> > it to you directly.
> >
> > Tony Frudakis, Ph.D.
> > DNAPrint genomics, Inc.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: TONY N FRUDAKIS [mailto:]
> > Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 4:05 PM
> > To:
> > Subject: RE: [DNA] DNAPrint Test: Validation Studies
> >
> > Also I have to say that the Chandler implication that our validation data
> is
> > just a few advertising jingo's and pretty pictures is enormously unfair to
> > our effort. We have spent millions developing this test and validating
> it.
> > Never before in the history of mankind has it been possible to detect
> > minority admixture from the DNA, and our validation data shows that the
> > detection of minority (and majority) admixture is sensible within the
> > context of pedigree analysis, that it usually correlates with self
> reported
> > mixture (though not always because, it appears, such knowledge is not
> always
> > complete or accurate) and that it is impervious to numerous trivial
> > environmental variables, such as input DNA quantity (which any laboratory
> > scientist would want to see, because such things can happen quite easily
> for
> > a poorly developed test). To merely whisk the data away with a swipe of
> the
> > hand is horribly unfair to the test.
> >
> > Let me share the attached figure, which is part of the remainder of the
> data
> > that we do not normally communicate to keep the document simple (I dont
> know
> > how attachments are handled by the server but I will try). This figure
> > shows that when the markers useful for resolving Native American and East
> > Asian ancestry are deleted from the analysis, the program has trouble with
> > the confidence and in this dimension of the plot, and only this dimension,
> > the confidence contours are dramatically skewed (basically the algorithm
> is
> > saying its not sure where the sample falls on the Native American/East
> Asian
> > axis because there are no good markers for resolving these ancestries in
> the
> > analysis). If this does not convince you the sequences are accurate
> > reporters and that the algorithm works, then I am at a loss.
> >
> > I think people need to reevaluate their expectations on what will be
> > possible to take from DNA. What many of you want is a 3.0 version of our
> > test, for finer resolution, not so far back in time as our current test.
> > Let me say that we want this too, but it is enormously expensive. Simply
> > put, nothing like this has ever existed before, and it will certainly get
> > better in the future, but let us appreciate the information the current
> > version provides to us as well because it means something.
> >
> > Tony.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Faux [mailto:]
> > Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 2:40 PM
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: [DNA] DNAPrint Test: Validation Studies
> >
> > Well, on this point we agree John. My conclusion in an e-mail to Drs.
> > Thomas and Frudakis, after reading the Validation Study, was that I was of
> > the opinion that the test was properly validated for forensic purposes
> > (actually it seems to be an excellent tool for that market) - but the
> > evidence was not compelling for those of us who wish to use the results
> for
> > genealogical purposes. This is not to say that the test is not useful for
> > genealogists, clearly it is, but for me, to be thoroughly convinced, for
> > example the East Asian sample sizes (10 Chinese and 10 Japanese) would
> need
> > to be larger. I offered them a detailed critique, page by page. I hope
> > others with an interest in the DNAPrint test will also offer their
> opinions
> > to the List. David.
> >
> > "John F. Chandler" <> wrote:
> > It appears to be aimed entirely at crime lab customers. Certainly, a
> > crime lab would want to know what happens if they send in a sample
> > containing blood from two individuals or contamination from a mouse,
> > but those things have no bearing on the validity of the test for the
> > hobby market. They did show some three-generation test results and
> > mumbled about the surprising difference between two siblings being
> > within a standard deviation (without saying how big the standard
> > deviation actually is). On the other hand, they made no comment
> > about the surprising admixture of NA in a Filipino or East Asian
> > in some Europeans. As a whole, I'd say it makes a good advertising
> > blurb for selling the product to crime labs, but that's about all.
> >
> > John Chandler
> >
> > ==============================
> > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records,
> go
> > to:
> > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237
> >
> > Dr. David K. Faux, 4028 Larwin Ave., Cypress, CA, 90630, USA
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> >
> > ==============================
> > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records,
> go
> > to:
> > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237
> >
> > ==============================
> > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records,
> go to:
> > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237
>
> ==============================
> To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go
> to:
> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237
>
> ==============================
> To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to:
> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237


This thread: