Tweet
There are at least 17 individuals in five different surname projects known to have a "null" value for marker DYS439 (as shown belows with an "X"):
Little 13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 X 13 13 29
Fox 13 24 14 11 11 15 12 12 X 13 13 29
Vines 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 X 13 13 29
Atkins 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 X 13 13 29
Adams 14 23 14 11 11 14 12 12 X 13 13 29
This condition appears in about 0.1% of all results, and is likely caused by at least one mutation in the flanking region of the marker. This makes it difficult for the lab to determine a value for DYS439.
The "null DYS439" is inherited within respective families, and there is some evidence it may be inherited from a common ancestor who predated the dawn of heriditary surnames in the British Isles.
Please reply to this posting if you have a "null DYS439" in your results and would like to explore the possibility of a common ancestor.
This subject has been addressed in the January 2004 GENEALOGY-DNA mailing list, but further comments are welcome here as well.
Little 13 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 X 13 13 29
Fox 13 24 14 11 11 15 12 12 X 13 13 29
Vines 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 X 13 13 29
Atkins 13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 X 13 13 29
Adams 14 23 14 11 11 14 12 12 X 13 13 29
This condition appears in about 0.1% of all results, and is likely caused by at least one mutation in the flanking region of the marker. This makes it difficult for the lab to determine a value for DYS439.
The "null DYS439" is inherited within respective families, and there is some evidence it may be inherited from a common ancestor who predated the dawn of heriditary surnames in the British Isles.
Please reply to this posting if you have a "null DYS439" in your results and would like to explore the possibility of a common ancestor.
This subject has been addressed in the January 2004 GENEALOGY-DNA mailing list, but further comments are welcome here as well.