Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Zero Big- Y matches in DF27

  1. #1
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    2,718
    Sex

    Zero Big- Y matches in DF27

    #399633 just received his Big Y results. He tested positive for BY22302, and was therefore placed into
    DF27 > ZZ12_1 > BY3332 > BY19284
    According to his Big Y Matches page.

    But he actually tested negative for BY19284.

    He has absolutely zero Big Y matches.
    Last edited by lgmayka; 11-30-2017 at 08:33 PM.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to lgmayka For This Useful Post:

     gotten (11-30-2017),  JMcB (11-30-2017),  [email protected] (11-30-2017)

  3. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    51
    Sex
    Location
    Maine, United States
    Ethnicity
    Franco-American
    Nationality
    United States
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b>U152>BY3604
    mtDNA (M)
    U4c2a

    Normandie France Canada Quebec Acadia United States of America
    My haplogroup is R1b-U152-L2-BY3604 but my maternal grandfathers was R1b-DF27-S225 and his family name was Raymond in Canada/USA but was originally de Faugas from Langon in southern France.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to St. Pierre For This Useful Post:

     Camulogène Rix (11-30-2017),  palamede (01-15-2018)

  5. #3
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    2,113
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    DF27, FGC15743
    mtDNA (M)
    T2f3

    Quote Originally Posted by lgmayka View Post

    He has absolutely zero Big Y matches.
    Those zeros are more apparent than real, they will get populated once the haplotree is updated following the huge rewrite of all the positions for Hg38. I had an email today suggesting that that process has been frozen for about eight weeks but is currently underway, and the backlog of known haplotree corrections will take another week or so to clear out. Then the BigY matches should get unlocked, and be more useful than the previous ones. That remains to be seen, but all it costs extra is some extra patience.

  6. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to razyn For This Useful Post:

     Angoliga (12-01-2017),  Dewsloth (11-30-2017),  gotten (11-30-2017),  JMcB (12-01-2017),  lgmayka (12-01-2017),  R.Rocca (12-01-2017),  rivergirl (12-03-2017),  Robert1 (12-01-2017),  [email protected] (11-30-2017),  St. Pierre (11-30-2017)

  7. #4
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    2,718
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by lgmayka View Post
    #399633 just received his Big Y results. He tested positive for BY22302, and was therefore placed into
    DF27 > ZZ12_1 > BY3332 > BY19284
    According to his Big Y Matches page.

    But he actually tested negative for BY19284.
    In fact, BY22302 is the only SNP at that level for which #399633 tested positive. He had no call at BY22301, and tested negative at
    A15900
    BY19284
    BY19285
    BY19286
    BY19287
    BY19288
    BY19289
    BY19290
    BY19291
    BY19292
    BY19293
    BY19294
    BY19295
    BY19296
    BY19297
    BY19298
    BY19299
    BY19300
    BY19301
    BY19302
    Z26495

  8. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,465
    Sex

    So #399633 should have a lot of unnamed variants and the difference between him and other people that are positive for BY22302 is probably more than 40 (more than 20 each) which means that even after the hg38 update is completely finished #399633 still won't have any matches unless a new kit appears with shared variants that are currently unnamed.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to ArmandoR1b For This Useful Post:

     lgmayka (12-01-2017)

  10. #6
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    2,718
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by ArmandoR1b View Post
    So #399633 should have a lot of unnamed variants and the difference between him and other people that are positive for BY22302 is probably more than 40 (more than 20 each) which means that even after the hg38 update is completely finished #399633 still won't have any matches unless a new kit appears with shared variants that are currently unnamed.
    #399633 has 44 unnamed variants, and the actual limit of the Big Y Matches page is 30. His patrilineage is ethnically German, but geographically from Wyrzysk, Poland.
    Last edited by lgmayka; 12-01-2017 at 08:56 PM.

  11. #7
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    2,113
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    DF27, FGC15743
    mtDNA (M)
    T2f3

    My recollection of the matter is dimming a bit, but it was lgmayka who described a group of peculiar STR matches as the "pseudo North/South cluster" on DNA-Forums, about the time I started reading those discussions (spring of 2011). And my kit number was among that "pseudo" (I prefer to think of it as "elite") group... now aka FGC15733, not that the FTDNA haplotree has quite cottoned to it.

    Except for known relatives on my father's side, my best match was then (on STRs), and continues to be now (on NGS-tested SNPs), an ethnic Kashubian family named Richert. They are also from Poland, and therefore familiar to the admin of that regional DNA project. In the R1b-DF27 project, those kits are 195834 and 44479.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to razyn For This Useful Post:

     lgmayka (12-01-2017)

  13. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,465
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by lgmayka View Post
    #399633 has 44 unnamed variants, and the actual limit of the Big Y Matches page is 30.
    I've seen where the actual cutoff has been discussed and I thought there were some people that weren't cutoff at 30. I can't remember which thread that was. Either way, 44 unnamed variants is too many to have matches due to a cutoff being added.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to ArmandoR1b For This Useful Post:

     lgmayka (12-01-2017)

  15. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    4,407
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by ArmandoR1b View Post
    I've seen where the actual cutoff has been discussed and I thought there were some people that weren't cutoff at 30. I can't remember which thread that was. Either way, 44 unnamed variants is too many to have matches due to a cutoff being added.
    I agree but I think the base of the problem is getting a consistent measurement for counting. All variants and all variant calls are NOT created equal. There needs to be a winnowing to only very high confidence variants before we even discuss what the cut-off/threshold should be.

    Setting a threshold for matching is similar challenge in the Y DNA STR matching. Imagine if that was riddled with no calls or questionable calls. There is such a fine line in the GD counting that would cause many, many problems. It's already only a rough tool in the first place and that is with very high confidence calls only.

  16. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TigerMW For This Useful Post:

     JMcB (12-04-2017),  lgmayka (12-02-2017),  msmarjoribanks (12-04-2017)

  17. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,465
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikewww View Post
    I agree but I think the base of the problem is getting a consistent measurement for counting. All variants and all variant calls are NOT created equal. There needs to be a winnowing to only very high confidence variants before we even discuss what the cut-off/threshold should be.

    Setting a threshold for matching is similar challenge in the Y DNA STR matching. Imagine if that was riddled with no calls or questionable calls. There is such a fine line in the GD counting that would cause many, many problems. It's already only a rough tool in the first place and that is with very high confidence calls only.
    I wasn't stating that I agree with the threshold. I was stating that kit #399633 has more variants than what is allowed for matching by FTDNA. I don't doubt that there will be some people with just a few too many variants due to a problem with questionable calls and what would be matches with too many no-calls causing people to not get some matches that they should. However, a total of 30 non-matching variants between two people, about 15 positive variants for each person, means the two people have a most recent common ancestor more than 1,000 years ago in the direct paternal line. Is it really necessary to see full names, email addresses, and tree from matches that aren't related genealogically? I can understand wanting to see the information displayed in the FTDNA project results or what is shown in YFull but I don't think that the rest of the information is necessary. So, if there are a few extra questionable calls for one person and some no-calls for another and the two people aren't showing as matches because of it the MRCA is probably from over 1,000 years ago anyway. I won't lose sleep over it if it happens to me.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to ArmandoR1b For This Useful Post:

     TigerMW (12-05-2017)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 45
    Last Post: 06-06-2021, 07:55 PM
  2. Replies: 82
    Last Post: 10-06-2020, 03:06 PM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-27-2019, 01:53 AM
  4. Replies: 56
    Last Post: 12-20-2015, 05:54 PM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-28-2013, 05:49 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •