View Single Post
  #6  
Old 20th November 2016, 04:45 PM
Armando Armando is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Contemplator View Post
That branch is also on the Big Tree under a different name as those SNPS were unnamed when Alex must have analyzed those files. So that makes it 27 out of 29 branches.
I see now that Y24895 is 17840874 G to T per https://www.yfull.com/snp-list-search/

I also see that it shows up in the Big Tree group of R-8992312-T-C

So, for that case it was the 2nd scenario that I had presented of Alex simply using different names for some of the same SNPs. More specifically Alex doesn't have a shorthand name at all. Either way, Alex didn't use the name that YFull uses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Contemplator View Post
I took a look at the DF27 branch in both trees. The Big Tree has 551 DF27 kits while YFull has 378. Both have 93 kits from 1k Genomes. YFull has 16 ERS/ERR kits that Big Tree doesn't. So removing the kits from research projects, that makes the count 458 DF27 kits on Big Tree and 269 on YFull.
Right, which is why I had stated there is more information and granularity in his [Alex's] tree as far as DF27 branches and where certain DF27 SNPs are found.

Since Alex's service is free there are more kits which leads to the more information and granularity of the DF27 tree. Alex's service is also normally faster and easier. There is no need to request a BAM file and the VCF file is readily available for download from the FTDNA page.

I already had the numbers since I have macros to pull the data but I hadn't posted them because Stephen Parrish seemed more interested in the SNPs one level downstream from DF27. I don't understand why he would be more interested in that than other information such as almost all of the same ones from YFull being found at Big Tree and more kits at Big Tree than YFull meaning more subclades below the SNPs one level downstream from DF27 at Alex W's Big Tree.

Last edited by Armando; 20th November 2016 at 04:49 PM.
Reply With Quote