Mikewww

10-21-2017, 12:09 AM

YFull uses a term called the "formed" date. I have read their definition and the formed date of a subclade is just date of the TMRCA of the parent clade. However, although the labeling does include "formed", in the detailed tables they show their calculations and have ages that some call "formed".

Below is a explanation. I understand how the tables/calculations work, I think, but I don't see these dates as particularly unique versus other SNP age estimates and their calculations. I've been told these are exclusives from YFull.

Please convince me of their value, but do so relative to the method that Iain McDonald uses. Is there really any added value in the term "formed" date? and are sub-table calculations showing the relative age between brother subclades any more useful than using Iain McDonald's TMRCA age estimates for subclades?

I do understand relative aging by SNP counting, either bottoms-up or tops-down but I do not think we have enough accuracy (because of variability in mutation rates) that getting into some of this precision is valuable anyway.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9k5g3mhhkkj59ty/SNP-Formation-4mike.jpg?dl=0

YFull provides two estimates each for “formed” and “TMRCA”.

The estimate provided in the info tables (“Formed 2” on dropbox .jpg above) is not labeled as such by YFull and is not readily available from any source other than YFull, to the best of my knowledge. If nothing else, it does provide a relative estimate of the order of formation of the children of an SNP. For example:

4814 YBP R-L21

4968 YBP ….. R-DF63

5096 YBP ….. ….. R-CTS6919

4529 YBP ….. ….. R-Y10997

4669 YBP ….. R-DF13

5527 YBP ….. ….. R-DF49

5476 YBP ….. ….. R-FGC19914

5280 YBP ….. ….. R-L679

5160 YBP ….. ….. R-CTS3386

5026 YBP ….. ….. R-Y14049

4855 YBP ….. ….. R-FGC5496

4601 YBP ….. ….. R-Y5717

4576 YBP ….. ….. R-CTS2501

4564 YBP ….. ….. R-CTS1751

4526 YBP ….. ….. R-Y16233

4483 YBP ….. ….. R-Z253

4454 YBP ….. ….. R-Z16503

4420 YBP ….. ….. R-Y9097

4396 YBP ….. ….. R-DF1

4289 YBP ….. ….. R-S1026

4285 YBP ….. ….. R-DF21

4275 YBP ….. ….. R-BY4048

4218 YBP ….. ….. R-Y5305

4210 YBP ….. ….. R-L1335

4133 YBP ….. ….. R-Z251

3923 YBP ….. ….. R-Y9090

3832 YBP ….. ….. R-FGC11134

3716 YBP ….. ….. R-S1051

3567 YBP ….. ….. R-Y30336

3294 YBP ….. ….. R-Z14303

3097 YBP ….. ….. R-Z255

2774 YBP ….. ….. R-L371

4236 YBP ….. R-A5846

4050 YBP ….. ….. R-Y16251

2949 YBP ….. R-A7906

2260 YBP ….. ….. R-FGC52350

1835 YBP ….. ….. R-A7908

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Regardless, is the fact that YFull provides "formed" dates a major exclusive value-add for their method?

Below is a explanation. I understand how the tables/calculations work, I think, but I don't see these dates as particularly unique versus other SNP age estimates and their calculations. I've been told these are exclusives from YFull.

Please convince me of their value, but do so relative to the method that Iain McDonald uses. Is there really any added value in the term "formed" date? and are sub-table calculations showing the relative age between brother subclades any more useful than using Iain McDonald's TMRCA age estimates for subclades?

I do understand relative aging by SNP counting, either bottoms-up or tops-down but I do not think we have enough accuracy (because of variability in mutation rates) that getting into some of this precision is valuable anyway.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9k5g3mhhkkj59ty/SNP-Formation-4mike.jpg?dl=0

YFull provides two estimates each for “formed” and “TMRCA”.

The estimate provided in the info tables (“Formed 2” on dropbox .jpg above) is not labeled as such by YFull and is not readily available from any source other than YFull, to the best of my knowledge. If nothing else, it does provide a relative estimate of the order of formation of the children of an SNP. For example:

4814 YBP R-L21

4968 YBP ….. R-DF63

5096 YBP ….. ….. R-CTS6919

4529 YBP ….. ….. R-Y10997

4669 YBP ….. R-DF13

5527 YBP ….. ….. R-DF49

5476 YBP ….. ….. R-FGC19914

5280 YBP ….. ….. R-L679

5160 YBP ….. ….. R-CTS3386

5026 YBP ….. ….. R-Y14049

4855 YBP ….. ….. R-FGC5496

4601 YBP ….. ….. R-Y5717

4576 YBP ….. ….. R-CTS2501

4564 YBP ….. ….. R-CTS1751

4526 YBP ….. ….. R-Y16233

4483 YBP ….. ….. R-Z253

4454 YBP ….. ….. R-Z16503

4420 YBP ….. ….. R-Y9097

4396 YBP ….. ….. R-DF1

4289 YBP ….. ….. R-S1026

4285 YBP ….. ….. R-DF21

4275 YBP ….. ….. R-BY4048

4218 YBP ….. ….. R-Y5305

4210 YBP ….. ….. R-L1335

4133 YBP ….. ….. R-Z251

3923 YBP ….. ….. R-Y9090

3832 YBP ….. ….. R-FGC11134

3716 YBP ….. ….. R-S1051

3567 YBP ….. ….. R-Y30336

3294 YBP ….. ….. R-Z14303

3097 YBP ….. ….. R-Z255

2774 YBP ….. ….. R-L371

4236 YBP ….. R-A5846

4050 YBP ….. ….. R-Y16251

2949 YBP ….. R-A7906

2260 YBP ….. ….. R-FGC52350

1835 YBP ….. ….. R-A7908

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Regardless, is the fact that YFull provides "formed" dates a major exclusive value-add for their method?