GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-08 > 1123200689


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] SNP mutation rates
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 18:11:29 -0600
References: <200508042344.j74NidmK011521@mail.rootsweb.com>


In principle one could construct a tree from the clustering structure of the
STR extended (many marker) haplotypes of the world. This would be a lot of
work without help of a good computer program, but we all have our computers
now. I really would not want to reconstruct the tree this way, but doing so
might be informative.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 5:44 PM
Subject: RE: [DNA] SNP mutation rates


> The answer has to be, "I hope not!" I would think one way to check
whether the
> current tree is simply an artifact of discovery or whether it represents
true
> phylogeny would be how well the current SNP tree correlates with some
other kind
> of evidence. > Diana
>
> > > >
> > This issue has concerned me for some time: do the (deep in
> > time) SNPs that
> > just happened to have been found determine the divisions of
> > the tree? So
> > that if all the work of the last decade or so were lost, and
> > the SNP hunters
> > had to start all over again, would we get a substantially
> > different tree by
> > the time we had discovered the first couple hundred SNPs the
> > second time
> > around?
> >
> > Ken
> >
>
>
>
> ==============================
> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the
> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more:
http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx
>
>


This thread: