DF 97 ordered today. Still trying to pin down when the NPE happened in my family tree as my surname has been traced back a long way and other Shazells do not share M222. Ed Shazell On 10 December 2013 08:00, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Projected DF97 negative (Lawrence Dill) > 2. Re: Projected DF97 negative (Susan Hedeen) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 16:35:16 -0800 (PST) > From: Lawrence Dill <[email protected]> > Subject: [R-M222] Projected DF97 negative > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > McConkey?84366 is DF85 positive and DF97 negative. > The following people are tested DF85 positive. They are > also projected to be DF97 negative because they are in > the same cluster with McConkey 84366. > McConchie 173398 > Shazell 194537 > Dill 73271 > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 20:34:49 -0500 > From: Susan Hedeen <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Projected DF97 negative > To: Lawrence Dill <[email protected]>, [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > You are correct that this Donnachaidh McConnachie group because of the > McConkey df85+ & df97- and the McConchie df85+ could be considered > firmly df85+ df97-; additionally, I do believe the prediction because of > cluster for the others to be df97- is a good prediction. > > With the testing, however, the two only confirmed are McConkey and Mac > Adam. With the McConnachie (McConchie 173398) the df85 was ordered to > confirm that group since there are several other McCs slated into that > group and we wanted to make certain even though the genetic distance > within this particular group is rather close. We did the same with the > other M222 McConnachie (variously spelled) groups and clustered Duncan > M222+ even though the GD w/Duncan is also close; but the GD among the > other McConnachie group isn't so close...there is diversity in > haplotypes there, and at some markers that are slower in mutating than > the majority. > > With all of these various snps being so new to us, and for most without > signature in terms of haplotype (df85 among them since it is so close to > the R-M222 modal), the investment to make certain is a good investment. > > Susan Hedeen > > On 12/9/2013 7:35 PM, Lawrence Dill wrote: > > McConkey 84366 is DF85 positive and DF97 negative. > > The following people are tested DF85 positive. They are > > also projected to be DF97 negative because they are in > > the same cluster with McConkey 84366. > > McConchie 173398 > > Shazell 194537 > > Dill 73271 > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 7, Issue 490 > ****************************************** >