GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-11 > 1163479967


From: (John Chandler)
Subject: Re: [DNA] Conference [recLOH]
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 23:52:47 -0500 (EST)
References: <539.c7d7c43.32821267@aol.com><455744E3.8030506@earthlink.net> <REME20061113210621@alum.mit.edu><45593B29.5080108@sbcglobal.net> <45593CB3.8090604@mchsi.com>
In-Reply-To: <45593CB3.8090604@mchsi.com> (message from Rebekah on Mon, 13 Nov2006 21:49:07 -0600)


Rebekah wrote:
> Yes, it looks on the surface like one 15 was copied over a 17 and the
> other over an 18 then the 9 was copied over the 10 but I am sure that it
> is not that simple. Maybe the 9-9 was the starting position and 9-10 is
> a mutation. Would having the DYS464 markers retested by the Houston Lab
> add additional information?

As I said, 9-10 is modal in this case. As for retesting, that's
already been done, with identical results. For completeness, I
should mention that DYS458 is also one step away from the mode,
but the 21 other markers all match. As it happens, this is a
case where the paper trail has a weak link, and so it may just be
a tantalizing coincidence.

John Chandler

This thread: