GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-12 > 1291910999


From: Vincent Vizachero <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] NW European R1b from Iberia?
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 11:09:59 -0500
References: <0A965AA0-40C8-44B3-9C79-A9EB11938E05@vizachero.com><201012090942.oB99gNdL003003@mail.rootsweb.com><AANLkTi=71WHCmdKtNxFKt2KbkhLfiHqFFMnHXHVonfCL@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=71WHCmdKtNxFKt2KbkhLfiHqFFMnHXHVonfCL@mail.gmail.com>


Mike,

Intraclade variance is always hard to interpret, and there are - as
you notice - additional challenges when you use that technique on a
paragroup rather than a proper clade.

One thing you can definite NOT infer from a paragroup's variance is
that you are estimating the TMRCA for the upstream clade. In other
words, the variance of R-P312* does not lead to a TMRCA estimate for R-
P312.

Vince


On Dec 9, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Mike W wrote:

> The challenge I have is that I question the validity of comparing the
> variance (and therefore also the TMRCA) of a paragroup versus a true
> subclade.


This thread: