Y-DNA Haplogroup prediction changes March 2015

[Jim Barrett]

I'm currently waiting on my R-L21 SNP result which was based on their prediction however like you mine has gone back to R-M269. If its a negative result I'm going to be quite angry.

If the results is negative it will prove that they were justified in moving your prediction back. If it is positive this will prove that their earlier prediction was correct in your case. And this is going to make you "quite angry". Don't you want FTDNA's prediction of Haplogroups to be correct 100% of the time? I do!

I say THANK YOU to FTDNA for being big enough to say, "We made a mistake, we are sorry, we'll try to do better"!

[D.Clade]

If the results is negative it will prove that they were justified in moving your prediction back. If it is positive this will prove that their earlier prediction was correct in your case. And this is going to make you "quite angry". Don't you want FTDNA's prediction of Haplogroups to be correct 100% of the time? I do!

I say THANK YOU to FTDNA for being big enough to say, "We made a mistake, we are sorry, we'll try to do better"!

If it's correct 100% of the time, it wouldn't be a prediction. FTDNA's predictions, correct or not, are not worth jack. If you are R1b-M269, predicted or confirmed, whoop-de-doo, it means little. Everybody need to test for SNPs in order to refine your haplogroup and get away from this prediction junk.
Joe B

[MMaddi]

If it's correct 100% of the time, it wouldn't be a prediction. FTDNA's predictions, correct or not, are not worth jack. If you are R1b-M269, predicted or confirmed, whoop-de-doo, it means little. Everybody need to test for SNPs in order to refine your haplogroup and get away from this prediction junk.
Joe B

Testing for SNPs is the only way to get a correct and proven result for haplogroup and subclade.

That being said, if FTDNA strongly emphasizes testing SNPs and de-emphasizes relying on their predictions, you'll surely see an outcry from those who complain that FTDNA is trying to soak them for more money. They get criticized for just giving a prediction and they'll get criticized for suggesting customers spend more money for a SNP test. We all know that's true.

I think it's best that FTDNA gives a prediction for the haplogroup, to the best of their ability. Those who are really interested in knowing their most downstream subclade will pay for SNP testing, maybe Big Y. Those who couldn't care less about their haplogroup, maybe because they're only interested in finding a close match to break down a brick wall, will just ignore the haplogroup prediction in most cases.

People have different reasons for testing and need different levels of testing to get the answer they're looking for. To each his own.

[Jim Barrett]

If it's correct 100% of the time, it wouldn't be a prediction. FTDNA's predictions, correct or not, are not worth jack. If you are R1b-M269, predicted or confirmed, whoop-de-doo, it means little. Everybody need to test for SNPs in order to refine your haplogroup and get away from this prediction junk.
Joe B

If it hasn't been SNP tested it is a prediction.

[Uncle Lucifer]

I don't think my predicted group ever went anywhere besides R-M269.

However, in browsing my raw data from 23andme, I got the following:


intergenic 15654428 rs11799226 C or G My Result: G


I'm assuming until told otherwise that is R-L21+

[PNGarrison]

You can look SNP locations up here:

http://ybrowse.org/gb2/gbrowse/chrY/?

That is L21.

[PNGarrison]

I have been testing prediction in kits that are known U106s by a weighted genetic distance from subclade modal haplotypes at 67 STRs. Each difference between copy number is divided by estimated mutation rate for that STR, so slow markers count proportionately more.

I don't know yet what the accuracy is, but I find that some haplotypes give a clear prediction, in that they have a much lower wGD from one subclade modal than all the others. Some haplotypes either don't have one wGD which is much lower than others or they have several low values in different parts of the tree, so there is no clear prediction.

The only reason for making predictions is to help people play the odds on what SNPs to test next if they aren't going to spring for sequencing.

[Fred]

I'd advise canceling the SNP test. Phylogenetically, P25 is R1b1; M269 is R1b1a2. P25 is upstream of your R-M269 prediction and if it goes through, you'll be stuck with the label until you test M269 &/or downstream SNPs.

Let's take FTDNA at its word: The R-M269 prediction is 100% reliable. And, it's been my experience that when they make that call it's right.

If you want to test just oone SNP, why not L173 which was your earlier prediction?

Two things pointed in the direction of M269; I had used another predictor, http://www.stevemorse.org/dna/hapest.php, which put me at 100% probability of R1b. Also, the vast majority of my 12 marker matches at GD 0 were R-M269.

I requested a cancellation of the SNP test today.

[dna]

Two things pointed in the direction of M269; I had used another predictor, http://www.stevemorse.org/dna/hapest.php, which put me at 100% probability of R1b. Also, the vast majority of my 12 marker matches at GD 0 were R-M269.

I requested a cancellation of the SNP test today.

Has anybody with GD=0 to you at 12 markers (or any of your matches with more markers) tested positive for any SNP upstream of M269?

W. (Mr.)

[Fred]

Has anybody with GD=0 to you at 12 markers (or any of your matches with more markers) tested positive for any SNP upstream of M269?

W. (Mr.)

The few that show Terminal SNP results are mostly down stream. I do have 3 matches with R-P25 as their terminal.

In a CSV download, I have about 440 matches at GD=0 and Y-12. 400 of them are R-M269 with no terminal listed. Most of the rest are further down stream from that. R-L21 (10) and R-P312 (9) being the most frequent of those.

My match counts drop drastically at Y-25. No GD=0, only 2 at GD=1 and 9 at GD=2.

I have no close matches at higher markers. At Y-67 I have only 3 matches, each at a GD of 6.

[dna]

The few that show Terminal SNP results are mostly down stream. I do have 3 matches with R-P25 as their terminal. [----]

Thank you!

By the way, that nicely shows why FTDNA had chosen to use more than the first 12 markers panel.

W. (Mr.)

[andrewjohn1317]

Great Announcements it’s great idea as very useful and more specific details,more like that an Expert will be able to advice.

[Mud Clerk]

R-M269

I was moved back to the R-M269 corral with the rest of the herd en masse. I should have been left on the Irish range roaming free with my R-L226 family. But, they wouldn't have any of that and threw the horse out with the trough water.

I have a close Y-DNA 111 cousin who is a confirmed, green L-226. On our Y-111 I think we may have a minor one or two value difference. He and I have established a documented paper trail and know the ancestor grandfather we both descended down from.

With all this, they won't move me back to a predicted R-L226 haplogroup and haven't given me the results of my R-L226 SNP test ordered on Jan. 02, 2015. A lab person has reportedly told a Help Desk person my result will come in next Friday but I am unsure about that as some batch #603 haven't arrived and a few of Batch # 611 have already arrived?

So, here I stand grazing on sour hay while my L226 family graze on organic, wild, sweet grass, and learn even more about their SNPs downstream from L226.

This is less a whine and more a whinny

[Fred]

A little update.

I was refunded on my P-25 SNP order and then earlier this month my P-312 SNP result came in positive. 15 day turn around on that!!.

I've ordered a Big Y. Batched yesterday in batch 620, expected between 6/24 and 7/8.

[Mud Clerk]

Batch 604

I RECEIVED MY L-226 SNP CONFIRMATION TODAY!!