GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-05 > 1115052680


From: "Lowe DNA" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] Editing help
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 11:51:20 -0500
In-Reply-To: <003001c54f2a$4c803ae0$c6559045@Ken1>


Ken...

"...I don't want the impression to develop on the list that folks are
"dead in the water" in deep ancestry population migration studies until
more SNPs are handed to us by the powers that be. They (more useful
SNPs at the subclade levels) could certainly make progress easier; but
they are not indispensable...."

STR's are great for possibly 10-20 generations....However, I see a lot
of guessing here whether a inquirer here is I1b or I1a or G or I from
their STR test results. And we end up confusing the newbies and many
times myself.

We seem to be having senior moments here... Haplogroup is defined by
SNPS.....not STRS.. We keep trying to identify a haplogroup with
STRS.

And because of this we keep sliding out onto thin ice using STRS to
guesstimate haplogroup and sub-clades.... Many of the guesses may be
close but many times these guesses are dead wrong.

Let us resolve two things for this year...
(1.) To ask testees to order a SNP test when the haplogroup guesstimate
seems to be ambiguous. Then there will be no question.

(2.) To request FTDNA and other testing companies to test for deep-level
SNPS. If this is not economically at the moment, then to search for
technologies that will bring these SNP subclade test costs down.

Bill




This thread: