Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How Recently Related are HVR1 Matches?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How Recently Related are HVR1 Matches?

    I apologize if this question has been asked before, but how recently related are our HVR1 matches? HVR2? Thanks a bunch!

  • #2
    http://www.isogg.org/ggfaq.htm

    ---
    37. If two people share an identical HVR-1 panel, what's the approximate TMRCA (Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor)?

    This is very hard to estimate, because of the variable mutation rates in different parts of the mtDNA molecule. FTDNA gives 52 generations as the median -- that is, 50% of people who match in HVR1 would find their common ancestor in 52 generations or less, while the other 50% would have to keep on looking.

    38. If the HVR-2 panel matches as well, what's the approximate TMRCA?

    FTDNA gives the median number as 28 generations.
    ---

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by lgmayka
      http://www.isogg.org/ggfaq.htm

      ---
      37. If two people share an identical HVR-1 panel, what's the approximate TMRCA (Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor)?

      This is very hard to estimate, because of the variable mutation rates in different parts of the mtDNA molecule. FTDNA gives 52 generations as the median -- that is, 50% of people who match in HVR1 would find their common ancestor in 52 generations or less, while the other 50% would have to keep on looking.

      38. If the HVR-2 panel matches as well, what's the approximate TMRCA?

      FTDNA gives the median number as 28 generations.
      ---
      Are those estimations valid to both if you have several mutations and if you have no or just one mutation (for example the common 16519C)?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Eki
        Are those estimations valid to both if you have several mutations and if you have no or just one mutation (for example the common 16519C)?
        FTDNA's estimates appear to be for exact matches. Any difference in mutations presumably pushes back the estimated common ancestor a millennium or two, though you are undoubtedly correct that a ubiquitous mutation like 16519C would not set it back as much as a rarer one.

        Comment


        • #5
          The Common 16519C?

          Why is this mutation so common and amongst whom is it common? Could someone please refer me to reading material if this question has already been asked a lot. Thanks a bunch!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by lgmayka
            FTDNA's estimates appear to be for exact matches. Any difference in mutations presumably pushes back the estimated common ancestor a millennium or two, though you are undoubtedly correct that a ubiquitous mutation like 16519C would not set it back as much as a rarer one.
            I was talking about exact matches. What I meant was that if someone has no mutations, could it have been that way several thousand of years and their mtDNA is more stable than for example mine who has 4 mutations. Could the number of mutations have some effect on the statistics, like it's easier to get 0 or 1 right in a lottery instead of 4 or more right?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Eki
              Could the number of mutations have some effect on the statistics, like it's easier to get 0 or 1 right in a lottery instead of 4 or more right?
              I agree with you to some extent, but keep in mind that the calculation is complicated by the fact that the Cambridge Reference Sequence (which defines what is or is not a 'mutation') is not the actual mitochondrial Eve, but rather a particular modern European who was of haplgroup H.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by lgmayka
                keep in mind that the calculation is complicated by the fact that the Cambridge Reference Sequence (which defines what is or is not a 'mutation') is not the actual mitochondrial Eve, but rather a particular modern European who was of haplgroup H.
                Yes, I came to that conclusion too, after I gave it some thought. It would however be nice to know if the CRS has more exact matches than an average person.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Mitochondrial Eve

                  Originally posted by lgmayka
                  I agree with you to some extent, but keep in mind that the calculation is complicated by the fact that the Cambridge Reference Sequence (which defines what is or is not a 'mutation') is not the actual mitochondrial Eve, but rather a particular modern European who was of haplgroup H.
                  Just curious, do you know if Mitochondrial Eve's mutations are known, or speculated upon? I would imagine that they must be close to those seen among L0. I guess it would be too difficult to switch from comparing to the CRS to a MERS (Mitochondrial Eve Reference Sequence.

                  TIA,
                  Sonia

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X