Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

to test or not markers DNA-F

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

  • to test or not markers DNA-F

    Hello, list. Quick question..... I see there are a total of 18 markers (not to mention the Palindromic pack) that are available due to the FTDNA/DNAF merger that are in addition to the previously offered Y-67 test. Of those 18, 9 are offered by SMGF. Of the 9 remaining (or 18 total for that matter) are any of these new markers known to have high mutation rates? Would the testing of these additional markers help in determining the actual relationship of two individuals with a 66/67 (FTDNA) match, who due to immigration, ancestors have been seperated for at least 8 generations ? Such is my dilemma. Thanks for your input.

  • #2
    The fastest mutating markers not included in the 67 marker test seem to be DYS461, DYS 463, DYS635, DYS643, and Y-GATA-A10.

    It is unlikely that further testing will pinpoint the relationship any better than the information you already have though. I suppose that if you tested five new markers and got matches on all five, you'd increase your confidence that the common ancestor lived very soon before the immigration. Or that maybe common ancestor is somehow post-immigration after all.
    Last edited by vineviz; 14 October 2006, 06:05 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by vineviz
      The fastest mutating markers not included in the 67 marker test seem to be DYS461, DYS 463, DYS635, DYS643, and Y-GATA-A10.
      Do you know if any of these are more volatile than the fastest markers already included in the 67-marker test?

      Comment


      • #4
        Many thanks Vineviz,

        I will keep those marker numbers in mind, and contact the match about the additional testing. The good thing about it is the person is as interested in it as I am.

        Are 66/67 matches common over the course of 8 generations of seperation?
        Is 66/67 more common in closer relationships? Our particular mismatch is located at what has been described to me as a "slowmover",DYS 447.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by efgen
          Do you know if any of these are more volatile than the fastest markers already included in the 67-marker test?
          I'd say that those would be about as mutative as the fastest markers in the last panel (markers 38-67) of the 67 marker panel. I couldn't be any more specific than that with the data I've got, but maybe someone else can be more conclusive. I don't think that any of them would be faster than the fastest markers in the 67 marker panel, though. DYS481 and DYS413 seem to be pretty variable.

          Comment


          • #6
            They are available now

            http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read...-10/1161013251
            "List, For those wondering what happened to these markers, according to Thomas Krahn, DYS714, 716, 717 and 1B07 will be added to Panel 4 in the next few days, price adjusted accordingly.
            Ron Scot"

            Thank you for ordering the DYS714, DYS716, DYS717, Y-GGAAT-1B07, Autosomal
            CCR 5 test. Your sample kit number is xxxxx. The price of your order is
            $44.70

            Jews and Vikings?
            http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read...-10/1160423725
            "Sydney PhD candidate Marc Buhler believes he has tracked down the source of
            an inherited shield against AIDS, an allele of the CCR5 chemokine receptor,
            which is shared by many people of Jewish and Viking ancestral origins."

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by robertmcm
              Are 66/67 matches common over the course of 8 generations of seperation?
              Is 66/67 more common in closer relationships? Our particular mismatch is located at what has been described to me as a "slowmover",DYS 447.
              I would say that a 65/67 or 66/67 match is pretty typical for folks sharing a common ancestor in the 8 to 12 generation range.

              Comment


              • #8
                Thanks for the info and input guys. He and I plan to do further testing.
                On that note, I notice a marker 464x in the palindromic pack. Is that marker the same 464 that has previously been tested by FTDNA?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by robertmcm
                  On that note, I notice a marker 464x in the palindromic pack. Is that marker the same 464 that has previously been tested by FTDNA?
                  DYS464X tests the same markers as DYS464, but in a slightly different fashion. It can show additional detail in some cases. DYS464X is probably worthwhile only if you are both R1b AND your DYS464 marker were a match using the previousl method.

                  https://www.biotix.de/modules.php?op...ticle&artid=11

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X