I suppose there must be a Sweet Spot for each marker in the y chromosome of each modern family, otherwise there would be just one 'universal sweet spot' that applied to everyone. If that were so, the distinction between various clades would be less apparent than is actually observed. The y chromosome is more like a ball of string than an extended optic fibre. Therefore some markers are buried deeply within, surrounded by companion markers; some by its immediate neighbours on the chromosome, others in addition by markers lying on more distant parts, yet others on the outside by proximity to part of its companion x chromosome. This 3-Dimensionality of the chromosome will presumably make markers on the outside more vulnerable to mutation by a stray cosmic ray. It seems possible that the reversion towards that 'family level' sweet spot could be influenced by the prevailing "shape" of adjacent markers in the chain— each itself independently subject to plus/minus mutation and influenced by the shape of its 3-D companions. If this were indeed the case, then perhaps comparisons should be based, at least, on triplets of adjacent markers, rather than just individual markers. Apologies if this argument makes life more complicated for some. I guess that's what science is about. M. On 25 Nov 2013, at 16:38, Susan Hedeen wrote: > It could be a valid conjecture, Robert. The question is, of course, > if > the sweet spot is pertinent here--that is, just what is it for DYS 460 > within the different sub-clades of R-M222, and which repeat value > (either 11 or 12) most closely represents what the sweet spot is. > > I mention the M222+ sub-clades. They are not fully defined yet, but > we > now know that they exist, and there well may be haplotype differences > among them. We do not yet know. > > Also of interest in your observation is the "modal" business. Your > remarks are IMO important to illustrate that modals are indeed a > constructed haplotype based on majority rule averages of the results > tested in addition to the fact that a modal can and will change as > more > results are added. > > Do not misunderstand me, modals are useful; however we often > misunderstand their utility and what they actually represent. > Additionally, as clearly noted previously, within these O'D results, > there are + and - df85 men all who fall within both the M222+ modal > and > the O'D modal values. > > It is the combination of testing, assessment, historical information > and > well documented genealogies in combination which will bring us the > best > clarity we may achieve...and at that there are aspects of all of this > which will remain theoretical and perhaps unknown or without > demonstration. Susan Hedeen > > On 11/25/2013 11:08 AM, Robert Doherty wrote: >> The Doherty modal (that John McLaughlin posted) matches the O'Niall >> modal except at three STRs. >> >> DYS458 Doherty = 18, O'Niall = 17 >> DYS460 Doherty = 12, O'Niall = 11 >> YCAII Doherty = 19-22, O'Niall = 19-23 >> >> Among the Doherty Surname Group participants in subgroup 1 (those >> who are M222 and have a Doherty surname - all variants), there are >> an equal number who have DYS460 = 11 and DYS460 = 12. Therefore >> the modal for this subgroup swings back and forth as participants >> are added to this sub group. >> >> Currently more M222 Dohertys have DYS460 = 11 than DYS460 = 12. >> But this may switch when the next M222 Doherty participant joins. >> >> While this may be not the same as the "sweet spot" concept where >> the STR value for an individual family line mutates back to a >> specific value, it seems this group is behaving this way. >> >> Bob Doherty >> Sent from my iPad >> >> ------------------------------- >> 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 >> > > > ------------------------------- > 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

And Len replied: Smile when you say that podnuh! 01110011 01101000 01101001 01110100 00100001 :-) On 11/25/2013 10:27 AM, Malcolm McClure wrote: > I suppose there must be a Sweet Spot for each marker in the y > chromosome of each modern family, otherwise there would be just one > 'universal sweet spot' that applied to everyone. If that were so, the > distinction between various clades would be less apparent than is > actually observed. > The y chromosome is more like a ball of string than an extended optic > fibre. Therefore some markers are buried deeply within, surrounded by > companion markers; some by its immediate neighbours on the chromosome, > others in addition by markers lying on more distant parts, yet others > on the outside by proximity to part of its companion x chromosome. > This 3-Dimensionality of the chromosome will presumably make markers > on the outside more vulnerable to mutation by a stray cosmic ray. > It seems possible that the reversion towards that 'family level' > sweet spot could be influenced by the prevailing "shape" of adjacent > markers in the chain— each itself independently subject to plus/minus > mutation and influenced by the shape of its 3-D companions. If this > were indeed the case, then perhaps comparisons should be based, at > least, on triplets of adjacent markers, rather than just individual > markers. > > Apologies if this argument makes life more complicated for some. I > guess that's what science is about. > > M. >