Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: FTDNA vs Yfull "private" SNP confusion?

  1. #21
    Registered Users
    Posts
    113
    Sex
    Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Ethnicity
    96% Danish
    Nationality
    Danish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-BY3604
    mtDNA (M)
    J1c4

    Denmark Germany
    Hi Mike!

    Thanks for your very complete answer.
    It was the automated results, so I guess next step is writing Michael Sanger.

    Thank you very much!
    Anders

  2. #22
    Registered Users
    Posts
    4,410
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    Quote Originally Posted by A.Morup View Post
    Hi Mike!

    Thanks for your very complete answer.
    It was the automated results, so I guess next step is writing Michael Sanger.

    Thank you very much!
    Anders
    Do you have new branching? or do you need a haplogroup label manually updated? These would be the reasons to engage Michael Sager. He's free but his job to update the haplotree and make sure people are on it in the right place.

    Evaluating singleton (some say private) SNPs for validity, region stability is not something he does. It should be related to branching to engage him.

    If you are just evaluating your singleton SNPs I trust your YFull interpretation is quite adequate. Your to do if there is no new branching is go get some. That's what I meant about recruiting people who are on your matching screen or who you share STR signature patterns with for Big Y testing.
    Last edited by TigerMW; 02-21-2017 at 04:46 PM.

  3. #23
    Registered Users
    Posts
    113
    Sex
    Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Ethnicity
    96% Danish
    Nationality
    Danish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-BY3604
    mtDNA (M)
    J1c4

    Denmark Germany
    Hi Mike!

    I have a very close match that I found through Y37 and BigY (and now Y111) and we are working tightly together to locate our common ancestor through the paper trail - Y111 says he must be just around the corner from where we are now (the year 1590 and 1655). Together we have 26 "novel" SNPs according to FTDNA - and a big step under BY3604 (see here at Ytree). I guess that we will see a new haplogroup under BY3604 forming with the next update of the Yfull tree. FTDNA has had our data for over 6 months, but did not update their tree (but that is not the issue here).

    We are at distance 4 at Y111 and have now shared the cost of third person (distance 10 at Y111) to take a BigY to elaborate our haplogroup under BY3604.

    Besides that, I am now proactively testing distant male cousins SNP by SNP at Yseq to see when my novel SNPs occured since this year ~1600 BigY match - just because it is possible.
    But the question is, which SNPs to test, when Yfull and FTDNA does not agree?

    My novel SNPs according to FTDNA: 16604xxx, 22271xxx, 22974xxx, 7511xxx
    My novel SNPs according to Yfull: 16604xxx, 3882xxx, 7511xxx

    22271xxx turned out to be in the DYZ19 zone
    3882xxx is homologuos at Yfull and useless according to Yseq - so why does Yfull even list it as an "Acceptable quality" SNP?

    Still wondering what happened to 22974xxx at Yfull - they initially rated it "Acceptable quality", but it disappeared as a novel SNP at Yfull, when my close match was processed. However, Yseq has just tested and confirmed it present in a remote cousin (MDKA born 1838).

    So - which novel SNPs can I test for between my close BigY match and today - that's the question...

    Kind regards
    Anders

    PS: Gave up writing to Michael Sager - no need to waste his time with private SNPs
    Last edited by A.Morup; 02-21-2017 at 04:51 PM.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to A.Morup For This Useful Post:

     vettor (02-21-2017)

  5. #24
    Registered Users
    Posts
    714
    Sex
    Location
    Texas
    Ethnicity
    English, Irish, German
    Nationality
    US
    Y-DNA (P)
    L21>L226>FGC5639

    England Germany Netherlands France Ireland Switzerland
    A.Morup -

    The most economical way to determine stability status of any Y chromosome position is to make "Wish a YSNP" at YSEQ (author of the ISOGG YBrowser). For only $1 each and now a minimum of $10 (new requirement). They will respond by adding all YSNPs into their ordering system (FTDNA will not do this) AND they will also reject all YSNPs in questionable areas with a very brief description. YSEQ is the strictest of all of the organizations for avoiding any possible inconsistency of testing in the future.

    But YSNPs in unstable areas can be extremely useful as well. Under L226, we originally included eight branches on our haplotree in unstable areas. After 50 NGS tests under L226, we had to remove two branches that had results inconsistent with the haplotree (some are still on the FTDNA haplotree and BigTree haplotree). Three of the remaining six branches are very significant major branches. So if you just discard YSNPs in unstable areas, you are going to have to do a lot more testing to get the same results. From a genealogist point of view, you would be discarding all records on deeds since they do not involve relationships in most cases - but sometimes are gold mines for "Deed of Gift" to children that would be missed.

    Other the other hand, YSNPs in unstable areas are a real pain to test. Some can only be tested by NGS testing. YSEQ will not allow these private YSNPs to be tested, so you lose that important source of testing. FTDNA's Mass Array technology (SNP packs) including a good portion of these YSNPs which have been very useful. Even Sanger Sequencing (individual YSNP testing) can not read several classes of these YSNPs in unstable areas. Under L226, our genetic bottlenecks reside under three major branches based on YSNPs in unstable areas. BY4100, Z17669 and DC40 have a whopping 68 private YSNPs stuck under these three branches (which have consistent testing results over 50 NGS tests and 50 more SNP pack tests).

    If we removed these branches, they would combine with other branches that already home to even more private YSNPs. BY4100 and DC40 are two branches in unstable areas that include 10 % of L226 testers at 67 markers. If they were not used, both would roll up to FGC5628 which covers over 50 % of L226 (both in known branches and total testers). The third major branch in an unstable ares is Z17669 which includes 80 % of L226. Without Z17669, our oldest first branch, DC69, would get lumped in together with starburst of six other branches. So these branches in unstable areas are worth testing - even if they could become inconsistent later and even if testing is much more of a challenge across technologies.
    Last edited by RobertCasey; 02-21-2017 at 06:29 PM.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to RobertCasey For This Useful Post:

     A.Morup (02-21-2017)

  7. #25
    Registered Users
    Posts
    6,147
    Sex
    Location
    Australia
    Ethnicity
    Italian Alpine
    Nationality
    Australian and Italian
    Y-DNA (P)
    T1a2b- SK1480
    mtDNA (M)
    H95a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b-S8172
    mtDNA (P)
    T2b17

    Australia Italy Veneto Friuli Italy Trentino Alto Adige Italy Ladinia Austria Tirol
    As noted to me by Yfull team recently...............my private SNP will become a non-private marker once a person who is not a family member is found. Once this happens , your once private marker will be a public marker and added to the yfull tree.


    My Path = ( K-M9+, LT-P326+, T-M184+, L490+, M70+, PF5664+, L131+, L446+, CTS933+, CTS3767+, CTS8862+, Z19945+, BY143483+ )


    Grandfather via paternal grandmother = I1-CTS6397 yDna
    Great grandmother paternal side = T1a1e mtDna
    Son's mtDna = K1a4p

  8. #26
    Registered Users
    Posts
    136
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-S20782
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a4
    Y-DNA (M)
    G-L497

    Italy
    Hi,
    about 22974xxx at Yfull, if you Browse raw data for that position can you see the row "Known SNPs at this position:" ?
    Adriano

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

     A.Morup (02-21-2017)

  10. #27
    Registered Users
    Posts
    113
    Sex
    Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Ethnicity
    96% Danish
    Nationality
    Danish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-BY3604
    mtDNA (M)
    J1c4

    Denmark Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by asquecco View Post
    Hi,
    about 22974xxx at Yfull, if you Browse raw data for that position can you see the row "Known SNPs at this position:" ?
    Adriano
    Yes - "YFC235673", but no "Known SNPs at this position" for 16604xxx and 7511xxx.
    So not private anyway?

    Thanks
    Anders

  11. #28
    Registered Users
    Posts
    136
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-S20782
    mtDNA (M)
    K1a4
    Y-DNA (M)
    G-L497

    Italy
    As far as I know YFC = YFull Candidate SNP. That's why it disappeared from the Novel SNPs list.
    But YFC SNPs are not yet listed in "Hg and SNPs - Known SNPs" TAB so at the moment it seems we have an issue if we want to list YFC SNPs + Novel SNPs for a kit.
    Adriano

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

     A.Morup (02-21-2017)

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. A Mutation Tree for YFull's NGS "500 STRs"
    By Dave-V in forum R1b-L21
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-16-2017, 04:39 PM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 09:51 PM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-20-2016, 03:09 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-07-2015, 03:05 AM
  5. "Missing Thread" Confusion
    By Administrator in forum Forum Support
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-16-2015, 04:40 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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