DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2011-12 > 1324796451


From: "Sandy Paterson" <>
Subject: Re: [R-M222] Ulster
Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2011 07:00:51 -0000
References: <d729.5dfc5326.3c27e745@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <d729.5dfc5326.3c27e745@aol.com>


They did exactly that.

UN26 is annotated as R1a
UN29 is annotated as IxI1b2
The rest are annotated as R1b3xR1bf

But I agree with you that only about 60% were M222+. DYS392 is the
give-away.

A smaller sample size results in a wider confidence interval, but it doesn't
introduce a bias. Including non M222+ introduces a huge bias (upward) and
because of the greater apparent diversity, causes a wider confidence
interval too. It's like being hit by a car into the path of an oncoming
train.

Sandy



-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of
Sent: 25 December 2011 02:41
To:
Subject: Re: [R-M222] Ulster



In a message dated 12/24/2011 3:10:30 A.M. Central Standard Time,
writes:

But that's not what bothers me about their study, it's the sloppiness
evidenced by including an R1a and an I haplogroup amongst the 59 used to
estimate the TMRCA.

I doubt they did that. I looked at their spreadsheet some years ago and
only about 60% of the 59 samples were M222. That would make the sample
size
even smaller though if they just used their IMH haplotypes from the 59.


John


R1b1c7 Research and Links:

http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: