If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Too rare haplotype, indeed. You may ignore 519, usually it doesn't make sense. In my database it appeared twice: the first sequence in McEvoy et al 2004, Ireland (1/200), the second one in Pliss et al. 2005, Latvians (1/299). The paper on the Latvians provides slightly more detailed classification:
-7025AluI -3007Bsh1236I which indicates being in H1. Obviously, you type may fall into a different subhaplogroup (untill you take H subclade test for your own sample and find out what this subclade is). On the other hand, taking into account the extremely low frequency of H with 177, you are more likely to be in H1 too.
Too rare haplotype, indeed. You may ignore 519, usually it doesn't make sense. In my database it appeared twice: the first sequence in McEvoy et al 2004, Ireland (1/200), the second one in Pliss et al. 2005, Latvians (1/299). The paper on the Latvians provides slightly more detailed classification: -7025AluI -3007Bsh1236I which indicates being in H1. Obviously, you type may fall into a different subhaplogroup (untill you take H subclade test for your own sample and find out what this subclade is). On the other hand, taking into account the extremely low frequency of H with 177, you are more likely to be in H1 too.
Valery
Could you please tell me what the title of the papers are that you referred to in your message?
Comment