Freedomite18
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2017
- Messages
- 44
- Reaction score
- 4
Here's a really great article that describes genetic testing. Remember that when they do a paternal genome testing they only look for a very small number of markers. When they do a genetic dna testing they look at hundreds of genetic markers which is why the paternity test they did for Lisa/RE was very basic in the information they received. It only gives them information as to paternity and actual DNA he may have left behind at a crime scene. I like to tell people it's like the difference between blood typing at a crime scene and DNA evidence at a crime scene. Paternity DNA is basic, genealogical DNA is very in depth. Here's the article from ancestry:
There are two main types of genetic tests to estimate a persons ancestry. One type is to trace an
individual persons maternal lineage (by looking at how genetic patterns are passed down from one
generation to the next generation through ones mother and her mother and her mother) or paternal
lineage (by looking at how genetic patterns are passed down through the fathers line). These
lineage-based genetic tests come in two forms: 1) mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) which is inherited
through the mothers line only and can give information to both males and females about a persons
maternal lineage, or 2) Y-chromosome DNA which is inherited through the fathers line and is
passed down only to males in each generation and can give information only to males about his
paternal lineage.
The other type of genetic ancestry test is one that makes estimates of a persons ancestry by
scanning through a persons overall genome and then using the information to determine which
continents their ancestors are from. These ancestry estimates use genetic markers called Ancestry
Informative Markers. Scientists use Ancestry Informative Markers to make predictions about a
persons ancestry using genetic markers and can tell a person if they are likely to have European,
African, or Asian ancestry. These predictions are based on statistics that come from how often or
rarely certain genetic markers show up across populations. For example, suppose a statistical result
shows that a person is very likely to be American Indian because they have a certain set of Ancestry
Informative Markers. If a different scientist took the same sample and looked at completely
different set of Ancestry Informative Markers, just by chance, that person may have a statistical
result that shows they are likely to be Asian, not American Indian. The results could be very
different, depending on the set of Ancestry Informative Markers that are used or on the population
that is being studied. It is important to keep in mind that none of these genetic markers can
definitively say whether a person is American Indian or not. It is also important to note that there is
no such thing as an American Indian gene.
Thank you Mom24. This explains a lot to me about DNA databases and their use. Running BE's daughter's DNA could yield relatives of her mother, which could reveal a bit about her relationship with BE.