Go Back   Family Tree DNA Forums > Paternal Lineages (Y-DNA) > BIG Y and SNP Discovery

BIG Y and SNP Discovery This area is for talk about BIG Y results.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 4th November 2017, 08:59 AM
dtvmcdonald dtvmcdonald is offline
mtDNA: | Big Y Pending
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivergirl View Post
Two of my projects have over 60% new results in.
So far none of the Big Y results from 2014 have come in. Batches 542, 544 and 575.
Of course, my relatives Big Y results are in this group.
We have several in those batches, including mine in 542.
Still, they are avoiding the interesting ones. (Of course,
they have no idea which ones these are.)
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 4th November 2017, 09:18 AM
JSW JSW is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 316
Are any of you seeing matches to the posted kits
I have just one of many kits back
Before the change it had 1000 matches
Now it has ZERO and you all are saying 50-60% are back
here is the Haplogroup from FTDNA

Your Confirmed Haplogroup is R-BY13975
Search
Haplogroup R-P312 is the descendant of the major R-P25 (aka R-M343) lineage and is the most common in Central Europe, Spain, France, Portugal, and the British Isles.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 4th November 2017, 01:29 PM
Wheal Wheal is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Illinois
Posts: 39
Blog Entries: 2
But we still don't have any matches.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wkauffman View Post
As of this morning the R-U106 project has 62% of the existing 1240 BigY results updated.
My dad's YFull is back, but we have no matches.

Does anyone know the meaning of the small blue markers and the pink markers with an 'N' in it
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 4th November 2017, 03:27 PM
dna dna is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,963
I can see definitely less matches (5-10%), but this time they look like somewhat relevant matches, that is they do not lead to a MRCA living 4 thousands or more years ago.

Mr. W
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 5th November 2017, 08:00 PM
vinnie vinnie is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,609
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie View Post
My revised results were updated a few days ago, and my one furthest downstream match appears, as he should. However, I have no upstream matches, and I know that there are several people who match us upstream, the more the further up the tree. Should I assume that these others haven't been processed yet? I'd be surprised if we're the only two J1 men who've been processed so far. Does anyone else have upstream matches?
Still wondering if anyone's seen any upstream matches who don't also match you on your terminal SNP - I haven't. I know they've still got a lot of kits to process, but unless I misunderstand, we should also see the names of people who match us upstream. Shouldn't we?
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 5th November 2017, 08:46 PM
The_Contemplator The_Contemplator is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 831
In one kit I have seen upstream matches that don't show up in the downstream match list. This kit currently has 1 match in the last step and 11 (10 others plus the same 1) in the 4 upstream steps. In other kits the downstream step matches are the ones who have so far shown up.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 6th November 2017, 12:45 PM
ljonas ljonas is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 2
No matches and new unnamed variant

My brother's results were returned a few weeks ago. He had no matches and six unnamed variants. He matches a man named Cairns whose results were not yet complete.
The results for Cairns showed up last night. I looked to see what had changed on my brother's report. Still no matches, but this is not surprising--many people aren't seeing matches yet.
But one new unnamed variant was on my brother's list: 9200996. It was rated as high quality; Reference G, genotype C. Yet when I clicked on the chromosome browser, it shows 33 reads, all ancestral. Has anybody else seen this?
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 6th November 2017, 01:00 PM
mwwalsh mwwalsh is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 152
Here is the count of Big Y results by day since the conversions began for those in the R1b project.

10/12 - 116
10/13 - 127
10/14 - 45
10/15 - 51
10/16 - 64
10/17 - 80
10/18 - 99
10/19 - 83
10/20 - 33
10/21 - 63
10/22 - 8
10/23 - 0
10/24 - 21
10/25 - 170
10/26 - 97
10/27 - 133
10/28 - 142
10/29 - 148
10/30 - 104
10/31 - 57
11/01 - 63
11/02 - 89
11/03 - 91
11/04 - 42
11/05 - 40

Hopefully, today will be an up day again. We have 40 so far today and are about 65% done with the conversions.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 6th November 2017, 01:42 PM
rewm60 rewm60 is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljonas View Post
My brother's results were returned a few weeks ago. He had no matches and six unnamed variants. He matches a man named Cairns whose results were not yet complete.
The results for Cairns showed up last night. I looked to see what had changed on my brother's report. Still no matches, but this is not surprising--many people aren't seeing matches yet.
But one new unnamed variant was on my brother's list: 9200996. It was rated as high quality; Reference G, genotype C. Yet when I clicked on the chromosome browser, it shows 33 reads, all ancestral. Has anybody else seen this?
I have the same unnamed variant but with 13 reads. Mine are all ancestral also.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 6th November 2017, 03:02 PM
dtvmcdonald dtvmcdonald is offline
mtDNA: | Big Y Pending
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljonas View Post
But one new unnamed variant was on my brother's list: 9200996. It was rated as high quality; Reference G, genotype C. Yet when I clicked on the chromosome browser, it shows 33 reads, all ancestral. Has anybody else seen this?
Yes, and various permutations involving known variants listed as ancestral but the browser showing all derived, as well as
a location being called but clearly a nocall, or a nocall but clearly either ancestral or derived.

These all look to be in the usual suspect bad areas both on their browser and at the corresponding places on the Build 37 BAM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Desired Enhancements to FTDNA Website wolong Group Administrators - Advanced Chat 6 13th November 2017 02:27 PM
How did you get started? lab Adoptees Forum 4 16th May 2017 09:32 PM
FTDNA Enhancements & Bug Fixes - 6/18/2014 efgen Announcements and New Features 8 20th June 2014 10:51 AM
Is 10th cousin a good estimate? Mylineage Paternal Lineage (Y-DNA STR) Advanced 3 10th March 2013 06:17 AM
Family Finder enhancements manoss Features Requests & Bug Reports Area 1 7th April 2011 02:41 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:08 AM.


Family Tree DNA - World Headquarters

1445 North Loop West, Suite 820
Houston, Texas 77008, USA

Phone: (713) 868-1438 | Fax: (832) 201-7147
Copyright 2001-2010 Genealogy by Genetics, Ltd.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.