In article <1993Mar11.121736.1 at kean.ucs.mun.ca> in bionet.molbio.gene-linkage
tlyoung at kean.ucs.mun.ca writes:
> The practice of genotyping a member of the CEPH collection of families,
>especially when using a microsatellite marker (ie. dinucleotide repeat),
>is a good way to standardize the "sizes" of alleles reported by various
>groups. My problem is that not everyone is using the same reference CEPH
>member to type! For example, Weber et al., Genomics 11, 695 (1991), uses
>person 133101 and 133102 whereas Weissenbach et al., Nature 359, 794 (1992)
>uses person 134702 (the paper doesn't include the alleles from person
>134702 but they are available by anonymous FTP from Genethon).
>> It would be NICE if everyone was using the same reference DNA as a
>standard. Are efforts being made in this direction? If not, what would it
>take to get people to use the same reference DNA?
>> Knowles et al., Am. J. Hum. Genetics, 51: 905 (1992) discussed the
>problems of discrepancies between allele sizes reported by different groups.
It seems that one solution would be to publish genotypes for 133101,
133102 and 134702 with reports of microsatellite markers and for GDB
to store genotype data on these reference individuals.
I suspect this issue is going to develop greater significance with
regard to the human diversity project which involves sampling many
hundreds of indigenous peoples.
Blank space courtesy of my news posting program!