PDA

View Full Version : Geno 2.0 Genographic Project Upgrade



History-of-Things
09-26-2012, 05:26 PM
Hi there. Just received an email that I'm an automatic upgrade to the Genographic Project's new Geno 2.0 chip. I suspect I've already tested everything that they are testing for this one, so the data transfer from FTDNA was no problem and easy to do. Any other former or active testing addicts get the free upgrade? I suspect several of you should have!

David
09-26-2012, 05:53 PM
I received the complimentary Geno 2.0 as well, so we know there are at least two DF21+ Geno 2.0 results.

Now I'm wondering what to do with the Geno 2.0 kit I paid for. (I could get a refund, but why do that when I can test another family member. :)

--david

Westpa
09-26-2012, 10:27 PM
I also received the email about a complimentary Geno 2.0 test. The problem is I can't tell which one of my relatives (whose FTDNA accounts are all attached to the same email address) received the free test... Can't wait until we can login and see the results.

David
09-27-2012, 01:49 AM
I also received the email about a complimentary Geno 2.0 test. The problem is I can't tell which one of my relatives (whose FTDNA accounts are all attached to the same email address) received the free test... Can't wait until we can login and see the results.
The FTDNA Help Desk should be able to you specifically which kit. If you had a WTY for one of the kits, that would be the highest probability.

--david

GTC
09-27-2012, 08:46 AM
Hi there. Just received an email that I'm an automatic upgrade to the Genographic Project's new Geno 2.0 chip. I suspect I've already tested everything that they are testing for this one, so the data transfer from FTDNA was no problem and easy to do. Any other former or active testing addicts get the free upgrade? I suspect several of you should have!

No dice here. As my mtDNA FMS result was used to identify a new branch on the phylotree I thought I may have been in with a chance.

However, did eligibility for a freebie depend on having tested though National Genographic originally? If so, then that would count me out as, although I sent my Y12 results to NG (and paid IIRC $15 to do so), I tested originally directly through FTDNA.

David
09-27-2012, 09:23 AM
...

However, did eligibility for a freebie depend on having tested though National Genographic originally? If so, then that would count me out as, although I sent my Y12 results to NG (and paid IIRC $15 to do so), I tested originally directly through FTDNA.

No, because that was what I did as well.

--david

Westpa
09-27-2012, 10:58 PM
However, did eligibility for a freebie depend on having tested though National Genographic originally? If so, then that would count me out as, although I sent my Y12 results to NG (and paid IIRC $15 to do so), I tested originally directly through FTDNA.

Nope, I did not test through Natl Geno 1.0 either. As for which tests qualified me for a complimentary Geno 2.0, it would have to be the the FGS (now FMS). I have two profiles at FTDNA - one for me and another for my dad. I did the FGS for both, as well as Family Finder for one and Y-67 marker testing (and several SNPs) on the other. No WTTY. In the email I received, they note that the previous testing we had done provided them a baseline to compare their new test to. I wonder if members with certain mtDNA haplogroups (perhaps the less common ones) have a higher likelihood of being selected for the complimentary test?

David
09-28-2012, 12:02 AM
...
I wonder if members with certain mtDNA haplogroups (perhaps the less common ones) have a higher likelihood of being selected for the complimentary test?
Might be it. Both my mtDNA and YDNA haplogroups are uncommon.

--david

AJL
09-28-2012, 12:35 AM
No dice here. As my mtDNA FMS result was used to identify a new branch on the phylotree I thought I may have been in with a chance.

Same here.

And I did WTY, and a new SNP in me was missed (not scored), and only scored later in a second WTY within my haplogroup.

GTC
09-28-2012, 04:36 AM
Same here.

And I did WTY, and a new SNP in me was missed (not scored), and only scored later in a second WTY within my haplogroup.

Given that sort of information, it strikes me that the beta testing of the chip may have been done with a comparatively small set of data. It would be very interesting to know how many free kits have been given out, but I guess we won't be told that.

David
09-28-2012, 05:18 AM
Given that sort of information, it strikes me that the beta testing of the chip may have been done with a comparatively small set of data. It would be very interesting to know how many free kits have been given out, but I guess we won't be told that.
Sorry, I can't find the exact reference, but I believe the freebie count from WTYs was something like 23, and somewhere around 300 for FMS tests.

--david

VinceT
09-28-2012, 05:24 AM
I missed out, despite having WTY complete in 2009, my Y-STR markers maxed out, and a full mtDNA genome sequence (U5a1a1-T152!) that still defies full classification and blatantly omitted from http://www.mtdnacommunity.org (Haplogroup TBD161 (http://www.mtdnacommunity.org/human-mtdna-phylogeny.aspx): "No complete mtDNA sequence stored by mtDNA Community falls within this haplogroup. Note: Inferred deep coalescing haplogroup nodes are not expected to have any contemporary mitogenomes matching them.").

Not that I'm complaining: I'm betting there's naught to be found for R-U106* (xZ381,Z18) on the Geno2.0 chip either. Maybe Geno3.0?

Eh, so much for the wacky outlier theory.

VinceT
09-28-2012, 05:28 AM
Sorry, I can't find the exact reference, but I believe the freebie count from WTYs was something like 23, and somewhere around 300 for FMS tests.

--david

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/R1b1c_U106-S21/message/7151



Posted By: cdmo29 Mon Aug 6, 2012








R1b-U106 Project Co-Administrator Mike Maddi and I had lunch with Bennett
Greenspan on Saturday. Bennett gave us a tour of the renovated lab, including
the new DNA storage machine with windows that allowed us to watch it perform its
various robotic tasks, efficiently filling little wells in plates with lots of
wonderful little DNA samplings.

The discussion naturally moved quickly towards the new National Geographic
"Genographic Project" Geno 2.0 test.

Bennett said that yes, individual SNP testing will remain at FTDNA, and when
significant or terminal branch SNPs are discovered via Geno 2.0 that are not
currently testable on an individual basis at FTDNA, they would be made testable.
Since we do not yet know the number of SNPs we are talking about, it's not yet
feasible to estimate when these will become available, but likely around the end
of the year.

But testers interested in testing lots of SNPs, for whatever reasons, should
sign up for the National Geographic Geno 2.0 test. Going forward, this test will
be the method for accomplishing this objective.

Bennett added that lots of SNPs from Asian labs, and Near Eastern/Mediterranean
labs, that we are mostly not otherwise familiar with, are included on the chip.
Additionally about 5,000 newly identified SNPs from the 1000 Genomes project
have been added to the chip. And of course, the chip tests mtDNA and autosomal
DNA as well as Y DNA. Aside from the reports about 12,000 Y SNPs on the chip,
Bennett added that about 1,000 of them are already known to be below Haplo R1,
however many are likely synonymous with current SNPs on the tree.

Bennett did say that the POSITIVE results from Y SNPs on the Geno 2.0 test, may
be re-merged with one's existing FTDNA account, and thereby will also show up on
the Project's public SNP list. As Administrators, Mike and I were very grateful
for this answer!

23 public WTY testers' samples, and approximately 300 FMS (aka mtDNA FGS)
testers' samples were used to help verify the chip. These testers will be
notified in the next few weeks, and they will receive Geno 2.0 refunds if they
have already ordered Geno 2.0, Bennett confirmed. They will also receive Geno
2.0 accounts that can be re-merged into their FTDNA accounts as well.

Geno 2.0 can be pre-ordered here:

http://shop.nationalgeographic.com/ngs/browse/productDetail.jsp?productId=200124\
6&gsk (http://shop.nationalgeographic.com/ngs/browse/productDetail.jsp?productId=2001246&gsk)

We asked Bennett to answer these particular questions, because we knew these
were questions that had not already been answered to our knowledge. I can't
answer other questions that I wasn't smart enough to think of asking him at
lunch, so please understand. And I cannot parse Bennett's words, so again,
please understand.

After our lunch with Bennett, I feel comfortable in recommending this test to
our members who feel it is appropriate for them and their circumstances.


Charles Moore
R1b-U106 Project Administrator

History-of-Things
09-28-2012, 10:20 AM
Might be it. Both my mtDNA and YDNA haplogroups are uncommon.

--david

This definitely might be the case. There are only about half a dozen people in the mtDNA J group with my haplogroup. I don't expect the "complimentary test" will show me anything I don't already know--I would imagine that I'm just a thoroughly tested solid reference--my suspicion is my FTDNA data will just be transfered. I'll let you know when I see the results.

Eldon
09-28-2012, 08:51 PM
I suspect the people chosen to vet the Geno 2.0 chip were chosen at random. I have taken every test I know of and have unusual results for both mtDNA and Y-DNA (like David) but I must have been off the horizon when they chose those to be used for vetting the Geno 2.0 chip. I have already purchased the Geno 2.0 test so the money is not an issue but it would be nice to know how they chose the ones they did choose. My curiosity must be out of control (as usual).

GailT
09-29-2012, 03:20 PM
...and a full mtDNA genome sequence (U5a1a1-T152!) that still defies full classification and blatantly omitted from http://www.mtdnacommunity.org (Haplogroup TBD161 (http://www.mtdnacommunity.org/human-mtdna-phylogeny.aspx): "No complete mtDNA sequence stored by mtDNA Community falls within this haplogroup. Note: Inferred deep coalescing haplogroup nodes are not expected to have any contemporary mitogenomes matching them.").

I'm veering off topic - but there are still some problems in the mtdnacommunity data base with some test results not shown or not classified. Vince - I think we can define a new U5a1a1 subclade for you based on one of your extra HVR1 mutations, I'll email you.
Gail

Wing Genealogist
10-07-2012, 10:45 AM
Someone reported this morning on another forum where their credit card has just been charged for the Nat Geno 2.0 test. This likely means they have begun the process to ship out the test kits. Let the fun begin!

GTC
10-07-2012, 01:08 PM
... Let the fun begin!

Indeed, but please also let the publishing begin!

History-of-Things
10-08-2012, 09:57 AM
Well, with the small pool we have here, it seems that free "kits" were not given out, but that our results were just being passed between FTDNA and Genographic. If someone is getting a free kit, let us know....

Wing Genealogist
10-08-2012, 12:21 PM
I have heard from a small number of folks (including David Reynolds) that they actually had received emails stating their DNA was used and they will be able to access their results (eventually) without paying.

History-of-Things
10-08-2012, 02:11 PM
Yes, as per above, I received the email too, but there was nothing in it to indicate new testing. Only data transfer. They certainly didn't ask for any additional DNA sample.

History-of-Things
12-12-2012, 01:41 AM
Well, the results are in. IMHO they are terribly unexciting. They have somewhat more detailed Y and mtDNA haplogroup designations but no new information on them. The autosomal component is rather odd. They designate me 42% Northern European, 38% Mediterranean, and 19% Southwest Asian. My two "reference populations" are German and Greek, which has in the former limited relevance to known ancestry and in the latter none at all. Keep in mind I am 93% documented for the last 6 generations and of this approximately 7/8ths is British and the remaining 1/8 a combination of German, French, Dutch,and probably Scandinavian. They also give me a 1.7% Neanderthal rating and a 2.0% on Denisovian. To me, this whole endeavor looks like a bust--glad I was one of the "free" ones--I would not myself pay for such results, which to me look inferior to the FTDNA data on which they are based.

Veridicus
12-13-2012, 03:22 AM
Well, the results are in. IMHO they are terribly unexciting. They have somewhat more detailed Y and mtDNA haplogroup designations but no new information on them. The autosomal component is rather odd. They designate me 42% Northern European, 38% Mediterranean, and 19% Southwest Asian. My two "reference populations" are German and Greek, which has in the former limited relevance to known ancestry and in the latter none at all. Keep in mind I am 93% documented for the last 6 generations and of this approximately 7/8ths is British and the remaining 1/8 a combination of German, French, Dutch,and probably Scandinavian. They also give me a 1.7% Neanderthal rating and a 2.0% on Denisovian. To me, this whole endeavor looks like a bust--glad I was one of the "free" ones--I would not myself pay for such results, which to me look inferior to the FTDNA data on which they are based.

I don't quite understand? I thought Geno 2.0 was primarily anthropological not genealogical. I understood the 'reference populations' as those that are closest to your admixture results not that they say anything about you being German or Greek or that your recent ancestors are from this geographic region but that this is your deep ancestry. Am I missing something? You sound disappointed even though you knew what your Y and mtDNA were already - what were you expecting that did not pan-out?

History-of-Things
12-13-2012, 03:28 AM
How is there a separation between anthropology and genealogy? The admixture results are well broad of all others I have received and I doubt their accuracy. I was expecting them to be a bit more on top of trends in understanding of Y and mtDNA results. They could have written the same text in the report some years ago....

Veridicus
12-13-2012, 04:05 AM
How is there a separation between anthropology and genealogy? The admixture results are well broad of all others I have received and I doubt their accuracy. I was expecting them to be a bit more on top of trends in understanding of Y and mtDNA results. They could have written the same text in the report some years ago....

My understanding is that companies like FTDNA and 23&Me try to hook you up with recent ancestors -cousins in order to help with your genealogical research and the GP does not - that was one of the reasons I did not get FTDNA's Family Finder and thought NG's test would be better than FTDNA's Population Finder. My understanding is that NG has alot of new Y-SNPs. I am new to this so this is just my recent understanding - I could be wrong?

History-of-Things
12-13-2012, 04:19 AM
NG has new SNPs compared to what they had previously, but FTDNA snp testing is ahead of them to my knowledge, and NG appears to have simply borrowed data from their affiliated tester, FTDNA, although for whatever reason their admixture map departs rather drastically.

Veridicus
12-13-2012, 04:32 AM
NG has new SNPs compared to what they had previously, but FTDNA snp testing is ahead of them to my knowledge, and NG appears to have simply borrowed data from their affiliated tester, FTDNA, although for whatever reason their admixture map departs rather drastically.

Hmmm! I thought I read that they not only used FTDNA SNPs but their own unique and never before tested SNP's. Oh well! I am pretty happy with the fact that I got my first look at my DNA. I don't expect them to get to personal on their site and expected that I will have to do my own detailed search for further info on these results.

History-of-Things
12-13-2012, 04:54 AM
Well, maybe someone else can chime in. All I can say is that I have another level of specificity on my Y-SNP from FTDNA, and that my mtDNA matches the FTDNA designation.

Veridicus
12-13-2012, 05:52 AM
Well, maybe someone else can chime in. All I can say is that I have another level of specificity on my Y-SNP from FTDNA, and that my mtDNA matches the FTDNA designation.

I see your terminal SNP is L21. It is true that they don't test for some but others they do. Here is a chart with the SNPs offered and not offered related to you. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/92587284/L21-Geno2.0.png

There maybe a reason why you did not test further downstream?

EDIT: Geno tests for DF21 and L720???

History-of-Things
12-13-2012, 08:18 PM
Genographic does not appear to test for L720. They recognized DF21 but say nothing about it. I was the original sample where L720 was found in L21 Walk Through the Y test at FTDNA.

MJost
12-13-2012, 10:56 PM
I just checked YMap and it shows your L720's are
count_derived: 12
count_tested: 121


MJost

History-of-Things
12-14-2012, 12:38 AM
I just checked YMap and it shows your L720's are
count_derived: 12
count_tested: 121

MJost

Wow. Thanks. I hope all the L720s step forward to be recognized!

MJost
12-16-2012, 03:52 PM
You know most of them already though.


MJost

R. Walker
02-18-2013, 12:42 AM
Well, we're a bit disappointed to say the least. My brother is R P312* by FTDNA. His Geno 2.0 only goes to R P310! We have been told that the probe for the P312 test was not working reliably so they dropped it. If we'd known that, we would have waited. So all he has in his results are the fill in markers above P310, and nothing new below. We are waiting for what the different projects can tell us once the admins have gone through his results. We have ordered DF29 on their advice.

Both he and I have the same autosomal analysis:
46% Mediterranean
36% Northern Euro
17% SW Asian
His Med. reference was against Greek, mine against Tuscan.
We have Swiss ancestry on our maternal side and Northern Italian ancestry on our paternal side.

I have more Neandertal and Denisovan than he does.

Since I had already done the FMS I didn't learn anything. But it will be useful in comparing matches with each other in FTDNA perhaps.

We have one more family member to test, but haven't done his swab yet. He has quite o bit of Isles ancestry, and a Swedish gr grandfather. So we'll see how he turns out. He's L21+.

TigerMW
02-09-2014, 03:51 PM
Well, we're a bit disappointed to say the least. My brother is R P312* by FTDNA. His Geno 2.0 only goes to R P310! We have been told that the probe for the P312 test was not working reliably so they dropped it. If we'd known that, we would have waited. So all he has in his results are the fill in markers above P310, and nothing new below. We are waiting for what the different projects can tell us once the admins have gone through his results. We have ordered DF29 on their advice.
....

Do you mean DF29 or possibly do you mean DF99 or DF27? Those are two key SNPs right below P312, particularly DF27.

VinceT
02-09-2014, 11:21 PM
Those are two possibilities; another is P312- DF100+.

GoldenHind
02-10-2014, 12:44 AM
Do you mean DF29 or possibly do you mean DF99 or DF27? Those are two key SNPs right below P312, particularly DF27.

Her post was nearly a year old. Her brother tested DF99+ some time ago.

Those of us who are DF99+ and tested with Geno 2 got a P310 result there.

Obviously not everyone who gets a P310 result with Geno 2 will be DF99+. Other possibilities are DF27(XZ196), P312** and, as indicated by Vince, P312- DF100+.