PDA

View Full Version : Geno 3.0, 2014?



cfp
03-23-2014, 02:40 PM
Hi,

Has any new information emerged on the 2014 version of the Geno test? It's mentioned here: http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Genographic_Project#Geno_Next_Generation_.282014.3 F.29

I've currently only done the 23andme test, but I'm quite tempted to do the NatGeo one too. However, if there's an improved version coming soonish it seems like it'd make sense to wait, at least as long as the new one also imports into FTDna.

Was anything said in the FTDna conference last November?

Best,

Tom

GoldenHind
03-23-2014, 08:43 PM
Hi,

Has any new information emerged on the 2014 version of the Geno test? It's mentioned here: http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Genographic_Project#Geno_Next_Generation_.282014.3 F.29

I've currently only done the 23andme test, but I'm quite tempted to do the NatGeo one too. However, if there's an improved version coming soonish it seems like it'd make sense to wait, at least as long as the new one also imports into FTDna.

Was anything said in the FTDna conference last November?

Best,

Tom

I think your decision to wait is a wise one, as there are some very common and significant SNPs missing from the current version. For example P312, which probably is found in more than half of R1b in Europe.

Joe B
03-23-2014, 10:31 PM
Hi,

Has any new information emerged on the 2014 version of the Geno test? It's mentioned here: http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Genographic_Project#Geno_Next_Generation_.282014.3 F.29

I've currently only done the 23andme test, but I'm quite tempted to do the NatGeo one too. However, if there's an improved version coming soonish it seems like it'd make sense to wait, at least as long as the new one also imports into FTDna.

Was anything said in the FTDna conference last November?

Best,

Tom
Hey Tom,
What is your y-haplogroup assignment with 23andme? Some haplogroups have done very well with Geno 2.0, and some have not.
Have you started an FTDNA account by having a Y-STR test? You'll want to get that going if you haven't already. 67 or 111 STRs would be gold or platinum testing. We like platinum!

Y-DNA STR testing chart http://isogg.org/wiki/Y-DNA_STR_testing_chart
Y-STR http://isogg.org/wiki/Y-STR

GoldenHind is right about waiting for a better SNP array test, I am. Who knows how long that wait will be? On the other hand, if you can benefit from Geno 2.0 testing now, why wait?
Welcome to Anthrogenica!
Joe

cfp
03-23-2014, 11:13 PM
According to 23andme I'm R1b1b2a1a2f*, which seems to be a celtic one. And my maternal line is U2, which is rather unspecific.
I've ported my 23andme results to FTDNA, but not done any of their tests yet. I was contemplating it, though the NatGeo one seems like potentially better value for money.

Thanks for the welcome, and for the advice on waiting.

rms2
03-23-2014, 11:46 PM
According to 23andme I'm R1b1b2a1a2f*, which seems to be a celtic one. And my maternal line is U2, which is rather unspecific.
I've ported my 23andme results to FTDNA, but not done any of their tests yet. I was contemplating it, though the NatGeo one seems like potentially better value for money.

Thanks for the welcome, and for the advice on waiting.

Unless I am mistaken, that is 23andMe's longhand version of R-L21, so you should be L21+. Have you joined the R L21 and Subclades Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-L21/default.aspx)? If not, you should.

When you join, please send the group admin (that's me) an email indicating that you tested L21+ with 23andMe.

Big Y and Chromo2 are better tests than Geno 2.0, especially for L21+ guys. You are wise to wait, if you want to test with the Geno Project.

Arbogan
05-24-2014, 12:57 PM
You rather go for FTDNA if you want go the haplogroup route. National genographic 2.0's haplogroup genealogy stuff is very basic. As for national genographics 2.0 autosmal test, it's worthless, their algorithim is unable to quantify affinities into smaller percentages than 2% . So if you have an affinity that is 1% it will show up as 2-3%. It's not worth doing until they make some serious autosmal test updates, there is some serious methodological flaw in it. In overall it was a disappointing test, and I probably would have spent it more sensibly by investing it in testing haplogroup markers or FTDNA's autosmal tests.

brygian
07-07-2014, 04:02 PM
Since last Monday the Geno 2.0 website is not at Beta stage anymore. They have redesigned the site. The only new functionality seems to be the percentage statistics for your haplogroups.

vettor
07-07-2014, 06:59 PM
Since last Monday the Geno 2.0 website is not at Beta stage anymore. They have redesigned the site. The only new functionality seems to be the percentage statistics for your haplogroups.

It's ( natgeno2) still a waste of time...............they still have failed to give me my negative SNP's ( which where promised )

Will natgeno3 be similar to geno2 ............promises which do not happen!

Kwheaton
07-07-2014, 11:53 PM
Unless I am mistaken, that is 23andMe's longhand version of R-L21, so you should be L21+. Have you joined the R L21 and Subclades Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-L21/default.aspx)? If not, you should.

When you join, please send the group admin (that's me) an email indicating that you tested L21+ with 23andMe.

Big Y and Chromo2 are better tests than Geno 2.0, especially for L21+ guys. You are wise to wait, if you want to test with the Geno Project.

I Would echo these comments regarding Geno 2.0. Although helpful for some Haplogroups overall there are better options including Full Y, Big Y Chromo 2 and some new products on the horizon like Silver Y and probably revamped Chromo 3, and maybe eventually a new Deep clade test. If you get itchy. Wait for a sale at YSEQ.com and purchase some likely downstream SNPs at (when on sale) $25 a pop!

zulkif
09-25-2014, 04:47 AM
Some haplogroups have done very well with Geno 2.0, and some have not.


Joe can you please specify?

Joe B
09-25-2014, 06:15 AM
Joe can you please specify?
There are a couple of things that affect the results from Geno 2.0 for different haplogroups. First, a lot of SNPs were not discovered or their position on the tree was unknown at the time the Geno 2.0 SNP array was designed so they were not included in the test. Another problem that cropped up was some SNPs that tested well with Sanger sequencing or Next Generation sequencing don't do well with the SNP array test and vice versa too.
For the project I work with, some people did very well with Geno 2.0 and has resulted in new branches on the ISOGG tree. For others, Geno 2.0 results were less information than we already knew and three steps back on the haplotree. The best advise is to find out how others in the suspected haplogroup have done with Geno 2.0. Also FTDNA may announce a new Deep Clade test in a couple of weeks that may be another good alternative.

zulkif
09-25-2014, 09:45 AM
Thank you for the answer!


Also FTDNA may announce a new Deep Clade test in a couple of weeks that may be another good alternative.

I am aware of that. I also hope Geno 2.1 or 3.0 will appear too, not sure what starting price we may expect.