Failed YDNA test -- no new sample

[Rheiner]

To try to get past a roadblock in research, I have paid for a couple of tests of likely relatives in Switzerland.

The last one returned ridiculous results (Haplogroup "F"), and only enough "matches" to count on one hand.

FTDNA has chosen to simply re-run the original sample, with a 6-8 week wait time. This doesn't make sense: The lab inaccurately processed the first sample, for unknown reasons. A new sample should be ordered.

I'm disappointed, and am considering other services for future tests.

In genetic genealogy, accuracy is all.

[bartarl260]

Were you in test batch 925 by any chance? A kit I was tracking had erroneous STR results in that batch which probably only was caught as quickly as it was due to a BigY test also being underway which didn't agree with the initial STR results. In that case they went from E-M35 to R-Z280+ which is "just a tiny bit of a difference." Not reassuring when errors occur, but as it probably coincided with the transition from Y500 to Y700, I could imagine a few lab miscues slipped through.

[dna]

You wrote likely relatives, and not that you are sure of that.

Two mislabelled vials do not seem to be likely, so I understand FTDNA actions.


On the other hand, I tend to use scientific approach, and I would use YSEQ to test for the SNP that defines the major haplogroup you are expecting, since F is ancestral to many popular European haplogroups. That would be a very cheap confirmation or disapproval of your hypothesis (and FTDNA lab results).


Mr. W.

P.S.
I might have thought differently, but nowadays I add Family Finder when ordering Y DNA and mtDNA tests. And I have asked my family to retroactively add Family Finder to all the older kits.

[bartarl260]

I don't think it is "mislabeled" so much as mis-queued. IE it correctly read labels 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. But when they were queued, they went in as 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 or something else equally strange.

[Rheiner]

Congratulations, Mr. W. You have completely missed the point.

Please look up Haplogroup F. It's not about the lack of a connection. It's about the absurdity of the result.

You wrote likely relatives, and not that you are sure of that.

Two mislabelled vials do not seem to be likely, so I understand FTDNA actions.


On the other hand, I tend to use scientific approach, and I would use YSEQ to test for the SNP that defines the major haplogroup you are expecting, since F is ancestral to many popular European haplogroups. That would be a very cheap confirmation or disapproval of your hypothesis (and FTDNA lab results).


Mr. W.

P.S.
I might have thought differently, but nowadays I add Family Finder when ordering Y DNA and mtDNA tests. And I have asked my family to retroactively add Family Finder to all the older kits.

[Rheiner]

Close -- Batch 926. Maybe you're on to something.

Were you in test batch 925 by any chance? A kit I was tracking had erroneous STR results in that batch which probably only was caught as quickly as it was due to a BigY test also being underway which didn't agree with the initial STR results. In that case they went from E-M35 to R-Z280+ which is "just a tiny bit of a difference." Not reassuring when errors occur, but as it probably coincided with the transition from Y500 to Y700, I could imagine a few lab miscues slipped through.

[dna]

@Rheiner, we just use different research methodologies. When I am faced with anything unusual, I plan on extending testing by using a different test (or tests), etc.

The problem could be with a sample or something with the FTDNA process or procedures, then an expensive independent test not only gives you a piece of mind, but also its results help in choosing the further direction.


Mr. W.

[Rheiner]

Yes, we do seem to use "different research methodologies." Your research methodologies may accept at face value a conclusion that a Swiss native is haplogroup F. Your research methodologies may even include paying for inaccurate tests.

Mine do not.

No more assistance from you, please. Thx.

[The_Contemplator]

I remember back in 2017, a couple of Big Y tested members in a surname project had their haplogroup designations updated from R-P312 to F-M89, while their Big Y matches had a R-BY### type haplogroup. It was right after one of their haplogroup updates. Even by looking at the data, they were obviously not from F but from R. (Yes, I know technically they are part of F-M89 as all R's are descendants of F-M89.) I reported it and they told me: "The F-M89 designation for these accounts are a result of a system glitch that occurred." They corrected the issue.

I heard of at least another one out there with the same issue (R to an F haplogroup). Perhaps there was an upstream SNP that was not found by the Big Y and the system handled it as if it was necessary for the R haplogroup designation. Though that is just speculation. I've seen a number of other Big Y testers in that group and I haven't seen that error pop up again with their cluster.

The tests are not inaccurate. The programmed system on the other hand can bring about some odd issues if it has some flaws that no one has run across.

I don't know the specific test you had this person take. If it was an STR test, the haplogroup is only predicted. Pretty well, but perhaps this STR haplotype was very uncommon and was confused for another. There are still some testers today that receive the free backbone SNP pack test to determine the haplogroup as theirs can't be predicted accurately. If the test was a SNP test or the Big Y, then you would see the list of SNPs that would point to the true haplogroup designation even if FTDNA's system missed it on its own.

Also, Mr. W., did not say he takes things at face value. His previous post clearly states he would extend testing. That is not taking things at face value. That is additional testing to help prove or disprove the initial testing.

I knew of a situation of someone getting the wrong (unexpected) haplogroup. His family tree and surname pointed to a specific R haplogroup, but he got an E haplogroup with few low level matches and none at Y37. I told him he may have had an NPE in his lineage at some point, perhaps even centuries ago. I suggested testing a distant cousin. He knew of none, so he went with a first cousin. I told him it was better than nothing but a distant one would likely be needed. The cousin did not match him (or his haplogroup). I suggested testing a different first cousin. He did and that one matched the earlier cousin tested. He was the odd man out. I suggested testing a brother, he had none. So he went with autosomal testing of himself and a sister. The result was half-siblings. The conclusion was his father was not his biological father.

I did do some quick searches for F and there were mentions of a few found in places they are usually not found like Portugal and Netherlands. Though there is a very limited number of testers in that haplogroup compared to others, so lots of questions for sure.

[dna]

@Rheiner, we just use different research methodologies. When I am faced with anything unusual, I plan on extending testing by using a different test (or tests), etc.

The problem could be with a sample or something with the FTDNA process or procedures, then an expensive independent test not only gives you a piece of mind, but also its results help in choosing the further direction.


Mr. W.

My apologies to the readers of this thread. The wording should have been an inexpensive independent test !

YSEQ is selling individual SNP tests for eighteen dollars each.


Mr. W.