Go Back   Family Tree DNA Forums > Paternal Lineages (Y-DNA) > Y-DNA Haplogroups & SNPs Advanced

Y-DNA Haplogroups & SNPs Advanced Users can talk about SNP based tests such as single SNP testing by Sanger sequencing, Geno 2.0 chip based testing, and next-generation sequencing tests like BIG Y.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 22nd October 2016, 11:09 PM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 24
Which is more important? Genetic distance or time to most recent common ancestor?

I have a match with someone who isn't a match according to genetic distance, but all the mismatch markers are 3-4 times faster than the average for the 37 marker test, so the time to most recent common ancestor is actually more recent than for people who fall within the genetic distance maximum. Does this mean anything?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 23rd October 2016, 12:51 AM
dna dna is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,553
Do you have TiP result for you and your non-match? If you are both in a project, that project administrator can run TiP for you.

Meaning? For example, you might get that you have 14% chance to be related in 8 generations, as opposed to 12% chance in 8 generations with the other people.

Both of you might want to upgrade to at least Y-DNA67, and/or SNP testing.


Mr W
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 23rd October 2016, 01:33 AM
prairielad prairielad is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,731
One thing you may want to consider is testing a different family member to rule out recent mutations in your line.

For example testing a paternal Uncle or someone from your fathers paternal Cousins line that shares the same yDNA (surname)line

My direct line (my Father and Grandfather) has had multiple recent mutations that give our line a GD of 4 at the 37 and 67 marker level to my Fathers paternal 1st cousin. My fathers 1st cousin is the closest to our surname matches with GD of 0 to 2 on those levels. My fathers (and his brother) results lose out on many of the matches that his cousin shows.

Last edited by prairielad; 23rd October 2016 at 01:35 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 23rd October 2016, 03:51 AM
dna dna is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by prairielad View Post
One thing you may want to consider is testing a different family member to rule out recent mutations in your line.

For example testing a paternal Uncle or someone from your fathers paternal Cousins line that shares the same yDNA (surname)line

My direct line (my Father and Grandfather) has had multiple recent mutations that give our line a GD of 4 at the 37 and 67 marker level to my Fathers paternal 1st cousin. My fathers 1st cousin is the closest to our surname matches with GD of 0 to 2 on those levels. My fathers (and his brother) results lose out on many of the matches that his cousin shows.
That is very true.

My close family has three different haplotypes. And reading the results right now, excluding ourselves, the haplotypes have at 12 markers:
  • 33 exact matches
  • 157 exact matches
  • 2617 exact matches

Mr W

P.S.
We also did Family Finder and SNP tests, so common patrilineal genetic ancestry is confirmed.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 16th November 2016, 09:13 AM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by dna View Post
Do you have TiP result for you and your non-match? If you are both in a project, that project administrator can run TiP for you.

Meaning? For example, you might get that you have 14% chance to be related in 8 generations, as opposed to 12% chance in 8 generations with the other people.

Both of you might want to upgrade to at least Y-DNA67, and/or SNP testing.


Mr W
Nobody can have a TiP for anyone who doesn't register as a match to them.

But using the 95% confidence level at McGee Y Utility returns a most recent common ancestor at 960 years ago.

The 50% confidence level returned 540 years ago, which is closer than anyone else has ever compared to me.

Because our mismatch markers are all very fast compared to the average for the 37 markers, I figure that my specific genetic distance of 6 at 37 markers is equal to about genetic distance of 3 or 4 average speed markers at 37 markers, which is almost a real match.

960 years actually makes sense to me. True and old.

Last edited by benowicz; 16th November 2016 at 09:16 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 16th November 2016, 10:11 AM
benowicz benowicz is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 24
No, that can't be. It must make no difference at all. Tinkering with McGee showed that they return the same time to most recent common ancestor no matter which specific markers are mismatched. This is only interesting compared to the lack of interesting things.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 16th November 2016, 06:51 PM
John McCoy John McCoy is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 516
It should be noted that "genetic distance" is a real metric, at least to the extent that you pay attention to what assumptions were made in computing it. Time or generations to the most recent common ancestor, however, is an estimate (starting from the "genetic distance" metric) that depends on many assumptions. Not only does this estimate come with some amount of error that cannot be precisely quantified, it also generates a very wide probability distribution. In other words, "genetic distance" is a relatively straightforward metric. "Time to most recent common ancestor" (TMRCA) is an estimate derived from the "genetic distance" and based on various additional assumptions that can't easily be tested. But TMRCA is formulated in an attempt to be meaningful in a genealogical context, while the "genetic distance" doesn't by itself tell us anything about genealogy.
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
Estimating time to the most recent common ancestor (TMRCA): comparison and applicatio PNGarrison Scientific Papers 0 16th December 2015 01:05 PM
Time to most recent common ancestor ??? 507 DNA and Genealogy for Beginners 5 20th October 2011 12:54 PM
Time to Most Recent Ancestor dntmclain DNA and Genealogy for Beginners 1 14th February 2009 04:14 PM
Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor L. A. Dean Group Administrators - Advanced Chat 0 15th November 2003 12:43 PM
Most recent common ancestor chart vlbar DNA and Genealogy for Beginners 0 1st May 2003 11:21 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:39 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 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.