Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

There was a delay in Y-DNA 12 marker testing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • There was a delay in Y-DNA 12 marker testing

    I wish FTDNA made an official announcement here. As a substitute, I am making one.

    The following explanation is quoted from an official FTDNA message to project administrators (but not everyone is in a project...):

    "Finally, we apologize for any delays you and your project members have experienced with the Y-DNA STR testing. The sole supplier of the reagent kit that we used for the first 12 markers unexpectedly stopped producing them. We had to develop an alternative processing method. After substantial R&D, we now have that method in place. While it took longer than expected to get this situation resolved, we’re able to continue providing and processing Y STR tests. The alternative - not being able to process the first 12 markers any more - would have been a disaster for everyone involved. The lab staff are working overtime to clear the backlog as quickly as possible."

  • #2
    Is there an explanation for a similar delay in Y-DNA 26-37 markers and YDNA 48-60 markers ????

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by lescon View Post
      Is there an explanation for a similar delay in Y-DNA 26-37 markers and YDNA 48-60 markers ????
      None that I am aware of... If you are waiting less than twice the time initially predicted, such delays often happen. Did you get any notification about a delay?

      I have started this thread since the explanation provided is significant in more than one way.

      W.

      Comment


      • #4
        We heard the same "reagents" excuse with the BigY delays too, did we not? I am not buying it.

        It appears that the expected date countdown is bogus too.
        Initially, it was 6-8 weeks, 4-6 weeks, 1-3 weeks, 1-2 weeks
        and now this announcement.

        The reality is that the DNA sample probably has been sitting in the collection tube unextracted the entire time.

        Why not be truthful and say we are really backed up due to heavy customer demand?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ajmr1a1 View Post
          We heard the same "reagents" excuse with the BigY delays too, did we not? I am not buying it.

          It appears that the expected date countdown is bogus too.
          Initially, it was 6-8 weeks, 4-6 weeks, 1-3 weeks, 1-2 weeks
          and now this announcement.

          The reality is that the DNA sample probably has been sitting in the collection tube unextracted the entire time.

          Why not be truthful and say we are really backed up due to heavy customer demand?
          The explanation seems genuine since many people reported delays only with the first 12 markers, while the volume of 12 marker tests is not substantially higher than that of the other STR tests. Why? One cannot order Y-DNA 12 marker test directly anymore.

          Comment


          • #6
            I suspect that the y-12 tests are considered by FTDNA to be the lowest priority test save the a la carte SNP test, which doesn't seem to be a priority at all.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ajmr1a1 View Post
              I suspect that the y-12 tests are considered by FTDNA to be the lowest priority test save the a la carte SNP test, which doesn't seem to be a priority at all.
              They cannot be like that, since when ordering any other Y-DNA marker test (25, 37, 67, 111) one gets Y-DNA 12 marker test as one of the components.

              W.

              Comment


              • #8
                Why would they use a different reagent for the first 12 STR markers than they do for the others?

                Comment


                • #9
                  I don't think that they use a different reagent for y-12 vs y-111 etc.

                  I just think that they want to use the remaing reagent first for high priority (expensive) tests rather than the y-12 test.

                  That is, if you believe the "reagent" story at all.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by ajmr1a1 View Post
                    I don't think that they use a different reagent for y-12 vs y-111 etc.

                    I just think that they want to use the remaing reagent first for high priority (expensive) tests rather than the y-12 test.
                    Well, the first 12 markers are an integral part of the Y-111 etc. Without those 12, you only get Y-99.


                    That is, if you believe the "reagent" story at all.
                    Well, yeah, there is that...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The "reagents" are primers, which are specifically designed to anneal to a particular target region. Those designed for 12 markers are probably different from those for the other regions. See:

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by ajmr1a1 View Post
                        That is, if you believe the "reagent" story at all.
                        The reagent story may explain why FTDNA has not (yet?) announced a holiday discount sale.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by jbarry6899 View Post
                          The "reagents" are primers, which are specifically designed to anneal to a particular target region. Those designed for 12 markers are probably different from those for the other regions. See:

                          http://seqcore.brcf.med.umich.edu/do...q/primers.html
                          Thank you!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by lgmayka View Post
                            The reagent story may explain why FTDNA has not (yet?) announced a holiday discount sale.
                            Larry, I hope that is the reason rather than the fact that FTDNA now is virtually a monopoly since AncestryDNA stopped YDNA testing.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by ajmr1a1 View Post
                              [----] FTDNA now is virtually a monopoly since AncestryDNA stopped YDNA testing.
                              Why would you consider such a statement?

                              Even if you confine yourself to the continental USA, there are companies competing precisely in the area of Y-DNA testing.

                              Up North in Canada, there is another major testing company, then across the pond in the UK...

                              These are neither front-ends nor shady companies.

                              W.

                              P.S. The fact that there are no transfer offers, tells me that the competition is real.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X