Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-12 > 1166085600

From: "Alister John Marsh" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Ellen's Paper
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 21:40:00 +1300
In-Reply-To: <000201c71f49$03de1c30$4001a8c0@BigMem2>

Question- would STRs in ancient DNA be less prone to being distorted by
degradation, than single bases/ SNPs? If a STR is a sequence of 5 base
repeats, even if several bases within the sequence were changed by
degradation, it might still be possible to infer the number of repeat
sequences in the STR?


-----Original Message-----
[mailto:] On Behalf Of John McEwan
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Ellen's Paper

Bonnie provided an illuminating e-mail and said
I don't know about its behavior after
centuries of decay, but why would its relative frequency of mutation
change, in comparison to other mutation sites?

I probably missed the point, but the chemical processes of ancient DNA
degradation on each base (and subsequent misreading by the sequencing
technology used) may well have little or no relationship to the "in
vivo" mutation rate which I think is what is being asserted in this

I have not done the full lit review on this, more a query.


John McEwan

To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: