The age may go up a little bit...there's lots to sort out yet previous to that, though. Through the testing, the down streams need be better assessed and fully positioned. It is very interesting, none the less.... On 11/19/2013 6:35 PM, Marcus McNeely wrote: > What a mutant bunch the R1b folks are. M222 is not very terminal at all > anymore, is it??? Will the age of M222 itself need to be adjusted if > subordinate SNPs have such a wide variance in STRs? > > >

I maintain my hunch on the DF97 modal and DYS 385 values of 11-12. 6% of M222 as a whole is quite a coincidence to have such a showing with five results in. I bet Strain is going to be positive as well. On 19 November 2013 18:40, Susan Hedeen <[email protected]>wrote: > The age may go up a little bit...there's lots to sort out yet previous > to that, though. Through the testing, the down streams need be better > assessed and fully positioned. It is very interesting, none the less.... > > On 11/19/2013 6:35 PM, Marcus McNeely wrote: > > What a mutant bunch the R1b folks are. M222 is not very terminal at all > > anymore, is it??? Will the age of M222 itself need to be adjusted if > > subordinate SNPs have such a wide variance in STRs? > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > 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 >