Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Correlation between new and old Y-DNA descriptions

Collapse
X
 
  • 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 - http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_YDNA_SNP_Index.html.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
      You'll probably find ISOGG's SNP Index for 2015 helpful - http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_YDNA_SNP_Index.html.
      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

      Comment


      • #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?!

        Comment


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

          M269,L150,L23,L51,L11,P311,P312
          M269,L150,L23,L51,L11,P311,P312,L21
          M269,L150,L23,L51,L11,P311,P312,L21,DF13,DF21,DF25 ,DF5
          M269,L150,L23,L51,L11,P311,U106

          or the same, but only using the branching points
          M269,P312
          M269,P312,L21
          M269,P312,L21,DF5
          M269,U106

          W. (Mr.)

          Comment

          Working...
          X