No announcement yet.

Correlation between new and old Y-DNA descriptions

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Correlation between new and old Y-DNA descriptions

    As I have not yet learned all the new terminal mutations I have great difficulty in referring the new Y-DNA descriptions back to the old I1, I2, R1a, R1b, etc. notations. If there anywhere a correlation table available that I can use as an aide-mémoire?

  • #2
    You'll probably find ISOGG's SNP Index for 2015 helpful -


    • #3
      Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
      You'll probably find ISOGG's SNP Index for 2015 helpful -
      And we need a better interface to aid us, both users and administrators, since today when looking at a profile I have no idea whether BY98765432 is R1a and BY98765423 is R1b.****

      Maybe the haplogroup information (terminal SNP) in a profile should be a hotspot that upon clicking (or mouseover event) displays the SNPs defining the branch that terminates in the indicated SNP?

      W. (Mr.)

      **** Fictitious SNP names


      • #4
        Thank you MMaddie,

        I should probably have been more specific. As one of the Co-Admins in the Norway Project I occasionally publish Project statistics, haplogroup percentages, distribution over the country, etc. in various graph forms. Till now I have, for the yDNA results, limited the number of haplogroups to the 7 biggest with I1, R1a and R1b being the 3 largest groups.

        Now, with the new "terminal SNP" designation we have, for example, for the R group 62 different terminal SNPs for the 558 R results. Yes, I know of the ISSOG site, and of course that is the ultimate authority for the various sub-groups, but it is far too complex a site for a quick check on the 62 varieties of hg R we have at the moment.

        What I had hoped for was that someone had already made the effort to compile a compact, simple, small table comparing the old and the new FTDNA haplogroup designations - is that too much to ask? I see the weather forecast for next week is not too good, may be I should spend the time and compile such a table myself?

        The progressive among you will probably say that I should in fact be using the new designations in my graphs anyway and may be, in the end, that will be the most efficient way to go?!


        • #5
          You can try not listing only terminal SNPs, but the SNPs defining the branch. For example

          M269,L150,L23,L51,L11,P311,P312,L21,DF13,DF21,DF25 ,DF5

          or the same, but only using the branching points

          W. (Mr.)