Geno 2.0 vs FTDNA family finder, SNP panels, MtDNA

[Kavellion]

So having done the Y37 thru FTDNA I would like to get into the other parts of the testing. Now when I upgraded from Y12 to Y37 last month my results took 2 and a half weeks from order to completion. Very fast.

It looks like if I put Family Finder, MtDNA, M343 panel into my shopping cart it comes out to 300 dollars and then I would have to spend another 100 dollars to do the next downstream panel. Am I pretty much going to get similar results with Geno 2.0 NG for $149 and then a transfer unlock fee? So seems like a boatload of money is saved there. Not having seen many sample Geno NG results with regards to terminal SNP I just don't know how far downstream it goes but some of what I read suggests it is going pretty far having used the Big Y results from other testers. In my reasoning here have I missed something other than the NG test result more than likely taking longer.

[Armando]

The problem with comparing Geno 2.0 is that there is no way to know how much you would save in the long run because you don't know what you terminal SNP is and the FTDNA SNP panels have some SNPs that aren't in the Geno 2.0 test. The other problem is that you don't get Full mtDNA matching with the Geno 2.0 transfer, so that is an extra expense that you need to calculate if you want that ability, and the Family Finder transfer cost is $39.

If your terminal SNP is well represented by Geno 2.0, and is much further down than what the M343 panel test, and you don't want mtDNA matching then the Geno 2.0 test is a good deal for you. The Geno 2.0 test does seem to take a lot longer though. I think L21 people get good results from Geno 2.0.

If your terminal SNP is not well represented by Geno 2.0, such as some DF27 subclades, you will still have to get more panels or individual SNP testing and if the Geno 2.0 test takes a lot longer than the panel test then you have a longer wait for results on top of the extra expense of another panel.

[The_Contemplator]

Something to consider is that mtDNA is considered the least useful of the 3 general types of DNA tests. You would need to get the FMS (Full MtDNA Sequence) to know which are your closest matches. Even then it might still not be that useful. You could wait for a sale for some of your testing if you have an idea of what you want.

Also how much SNP testing are you interested in? Do you want to find your most terminal SNP possible? Or just have a general idea even if you don't test for your lowest branch? There are many SNPs that FTDNA does not specifically test for. If you want to find new SNPs unique to you and your closest relatives then maybe a Big Y is the way for you. It is pricey but it is cheaper than testing various single SNPs and packs for similar information.

Though if you have some close matches on Y-DNA, take a look at what haplogroups they belong with. Maybe one or two has done extensive SNP testing. If so you could narrow down which SNPs to test for. Your haplogroup project admin could help with this.

[lgmayka]

Here's one way to look at the issue.

For someone in the United States, Geno 2.0 Next Gen is only $150. The upgrade to Family Finder is $39, for a total of $189.

Family Finder alone is $99. Let's assume that you definitely want this. (Most genealogists do.)

So for $90, you get fairly good Y-SNP testing plus an mtDNA haplogroup. That's a pretty good deal, especially if you have no specific reason to order full mtDNA sequencing. (Most people don't.)

[Kavellion]

Weirdly that last bit of math helped me decide. No I don't really need an mtDNA haplogroup. So maybe doing a M343 and FF would cost similar and I would get results way way quicker and no transfer headaches.

[lgmayka]

So maybe doing a M343 and FF would cost similar and I would get results way way quicker and no transfer headaches.

Please understand, though, that the R1b-M343 Backbone SNP Pack may or may not resolve your clade as thoroughly as Geno 2.0 Next Generation. The scattered reports I have seen suggest that:

- When fully debugged, Geno 2.0 Next Gen will provide better resolution for Western European R1b guys than the Backbone SNP Pack.

- Geno 2.0 Next Gen is not fully debugged yet.

[Armando]

Please understand, though, that the R1b-M343 Backbone SNP Pack may or may not resolve your clade as thoroughly as Geno 2.0 Next Generation. The scattered reports I have seen suggest that:

- When fully debugged, Geno 2.0 Next Gen will provide better resolution for Western European R1b guys than the Backbone SNP Pack.

- Geno 2.0 Next Gen is not fully debugged yet.

That is fully dependent on the person's terminal SNP and which SNPs are tested by Geno 2.0 Next Gen. For instance, if a person is terminal for L584 they won't know that because Geno 2.0 Next Gen doesn't test that SNP but the Backbone SNP Pack does. If a person is terminal for DF27 they won't even get DF27 as their terminal SNP from Geno 2.0 Next Gen. They will be assigned another SNP, such as CTS278, based on faulty testing by Geno 2.0 Next Gen. That doesn't happen with the R1b-M343 Backbone SNP Pack because it tests DF27 and Geno 2.0 Next Gen does not.

[Armando]

These are the SNPs tested by the R1b-M343 Backbone SNP Pack that are not tested by Geno 2.0 NextGen.

L278 P297 M269 P311 P312 L513 SRY2627 Z295 Z225 CTS11567 F2691 PF3252 Z1862 DF99 Z326 L389 M335 DF27 DF95 DF49 Z17 S6317 A1773 A2150 A274 A4670 A517 BY2868 BY575 CTS11994 DF17 DF41 DF83 FGC10516 FGC11134 FGC22501 FGC396 FGC5336 FGC5344 FGC5494 FGC5798 L408 L584 L881 M1994 S11493 S12025 S16264 S1688 S18632 Z2103 Z2109 Z251 Z2542 Z2573 Z301 Z302 DF103 Z17300 BY653 CTS3937 BY2823 FGC13620 FGC5301 FGC5345 FGC5351 FGC5354 FGC5356 FGC5367 FGC5373 PF7600 S1567 S18827 S7721 Z296 FGC3861

[Kavellion]

Well wow now I for sure want to do the 343 rather than geno 2.0 NG. Glad I asked.

[wombat]

Please understand, though, that the R1b-M343 Backbone SNP Pack may or may not resolve your clade as thoroughly as Geno 2.0 Next Generation. The scattered reports I have seen suggest that:

- When fully debugged, Geno 2.0 Next Gen will provide better resolution for Western European R1b guys than the Backbone SNP Pack.

- Geno 2.0 Next Gen is not fully debugged yet.

Hmm well from what I see from the free FTDNA transfer, they have actually tested LESS R1b SNPs than the old test did! At least in the R-L20 branch region!

[wombat]

Geno 2.0 NG tests not a single SNP downstream of R-L20 while the old test tested a few!
Geno 2.0 NG tests apparently nothing downstream of mtDNA V while the old test covered the entire next level plus a couple of the level beyond that!

[Armando]

Geno 2.0 NG tests not a single SNP downstream of R-L20 while the old test tested a few!
Geno 2.0 NG tests apparently nothing downstream of mtDNA V while the old test covered the entire next level plus a couple of the level beyond that!

The original Geno 2.0 tested these SNP downstream from L20 which are all in the 3 April 2016 ISOGG tree as R1b1a1a2a1a2b1a1~ - L737, L739, Z291, Z383 and for R1b1a1a2a1a2b1a1a which are CTS11795 and PF121 in the same ISOGG tree. The only SNPs missing from the Geno 2.0 NextGen are L737, Z291, and Z383 which are phylogenetically equivalent to L739 anyway.

There are 12,051 SNPs in the original Geno 2.0 test and there are 13,630 SNPs in the Geno 2.0 NextGen test. The BigY tests more than 36,400 Y-DNA positions. With a sale and a coupon the BigY is a better deal because only one other company tests more Y-DNA positions but for a higher price.

The mtDNA test from Geno 2.0 NextGen is already known not to test the whole mitochondrion and not to provide matching.

[wombat]

Geno 2.0 NG tests not a single SNP downstream of R-L20 while the old test tested a few!
Geno 2.0 NG tests apparently nothing downstream of mtDNA V while the old test covered the entire next level plus a couple of the level beyond that!

Actually it turns out this is not the case, the way FTDNA handles the transfer is very misleading. It does seem like they removed two of the three or four sub-branches that they used to track for sub-L20, not sure why since they still appear on the FTDNA haplogroup tree that they worked out wiht FTDNA. They didn't add two others on there (one I can understand since it looks like it's all but unique). But it seems like there is one they did add that the old test didn't cover. However, FTDNA might be failing to show it and they seem to show it as untested, but it is tested. Either they are messing up, they found it's not reliable or they found it needs to be read in reverse (but the whole fact that FTDNA only sometimes puts tested but negative SNPs below your main group SNP is VERY confusing and misleading).

[Armando]

However, FTDNA might be failing to show it and they seem to show it as untested, but it is tested. Either they are messing up, they found it's not reliable or ........ (but the whole fact that FTDNA only sometimes puts tested but negative SNPs below your main group SNP is VERY confusing and misleading).

This is one reason why Geno 2.0 is a bad test. The other reason is that there are a lot of false positives and maybe even some false negatives. A third reason is that most people can't use spreadsheet functions there to create a spreadsheet that extrapolates the SNPs pertinent to their subclade.