Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-11 > 1067965592

From: "Kay Martin" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Puzzling Result: Statistician Needed?
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 11:06:32 -0600
References: <>

Jim, do have A and B of your study upgrade their tests right away. 12 markers just are not enough. I personally think it would be a very good idea to find at least one more cousin from each family who will agree to the test as well (25 markers). Having more test results to look at will help make the picture much clearer for you. I would look for a fairly distant cousin of A and B, but still one who has a good paper trail. Good luck!

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 8:53 AM
Subject: [DNA] Puzzling Result: Statistician Needed?

A hard-to-fathom result has occurred recently in our BROWN surname study. I
believe it's unlike anything seen previously in the project, or anything I've
noticed in the discussions on this list.

The background is that participant B joined the project primarily to test the
proposition that his BROWN line was related to that of participant A. People
researching the two families thought they had very strong "paper trail"
evidence suggesting a common BROWN ancestry, and they even thought they could see a
physical resemblance between members of the two lines.

This thread: