Thanks David. One problem is that the Modal in my case is actually two individuals with DYS461/449 = 13/29. If either individual #1 or #2 were the real modal, there would still have to be a mutation to "my modal," and this mutation would duplicate one of the other mutations. Bruce In a message dated 3/27/2006 5:48:34 PM Central Standard Time, dmcduke@comcast.net writes: Bruce, One thing that may be (probably?) throwing you is thinking of the Modal as THE ancestral haplotype. It could be...it is probably very close in many/most cases when you have a large sampling. But, you're never sure there's not an unintended bias such as the lines carrying the ancestral value for a particular marker not being as prolific. From your description, I got the following values: Individual DYS461 DYS449 MODAL 13 29 Indv #1 12 29 Indv #2 13 28 Indv #3 12 28 If, in the above example, the Ancestral haplotype was in actuality DYS461/449 = 13/28 or 12/29 your need for a parallel mutation goes away. If 13/28, individual #2's line would still be carrying the ancestral haplotype. A single mutation at DYS461 would account for individual #3 and a single mutation at DYS449 would account for individual #1. Both would be one step from the ancestral line. With the 12/29 scenario, individual #1 would be carrying the ancestral haplotype. A mutation at DYS449 takes you to individual #3 and then a mutation at DYS461 could take you to individual #2. Individual 3 would be 1 step from the ancestral line while #2 would be 2 steps away. I tend to like the simplest answers. While parallel mutations can and I'm sure do take place, absent a paper trail, I would be inclined to go with one of the two modal values not being ancestral. David M