why botched tests?

[nekocat]

I'm pretty thick headed today, but this doesn't make sense to me. the original tests were fine, why aren't the upgrades, and why is the deep clade taking so long?

these are our pending test remarks for today, when we were due to get the upgrades and deep clade returns.

Deep Clade-R(DCLADE-R) 02/06/2009 286 The Deep Clade tests are performed in a series of rounds to pinpoint your position on the current Y-DNA Haplogroup Tree. Your sample requires more than the average number of rounds to complete this testing process. As each round is completed, those results are added to your Y-DNA Haplotree and Y-DNA DYS Values sections. The next testing round is expected to be complete by this date.

Y-Refine37to67(Y-DNA38-47 Markers) 02/13/2009 286 This test failed to yield results for your sample. Your sample is being rerun now. Results from this round of testing are expected by this date.

Y-Refine37to67(Y-DNA48-60 Markers) 02/13/2009 286 This test failed to yield results for your sample. Your sample is being rerun now. Results from this round of testing are expected by this date.

Y-Refine37to67(Y-DNA61-67 Markers) 02/13/2009 286 This test failed to yield results for your sample. Your sample is being rerun now. Results from this round of testing are expected by this date.

[Deirwha]

I don't think the tests were botched

[QUOTE=nekocat;128883]I'm pretty thick headed today, but this doesn't make sense to me. the original tests were fine, why aren't the upgrades, and why is the deep clade taking so long?"

I understand, but let me offer a glass half full thought:

There is a very stringent protocol FT DNA follows. This is a good thing. The messages you receive are not telling you the tests were botched but that they did not yield clear and unequivocal results. They are telling you they are following an exacting protocol each time they test your results and this time it didn't all quite fit together. I received a similar message on my still pending FGS after the same sampling method at the same time yielded results on my HVR1 and HVR2. You ask yourself why, but it is not necessarily a reflection on the sampling or a misreading the first time. It is a reflection of redoing the protocol and not getting clear and indisputable results.

Here is a related point: I got results that first time. But the result it yielded put me at one mutation difference from my known second cousin. Why? Probably because they are testing information at the molecular level that can depending on variables register or not register as a separate mutation when in fact is a shadow "double" registration of a long molecule. Contamination remains a possibility if exacting standards are not followed, but not likely in this case. So my second cousin and I have lived with the discrepancy in our MT DNA for now 6 months pending the FGS, knowing it was probably a "shadow" but what your head knows does not necessarily dispel anxiety.

Errors do occur. When an error does occur it will throw you off for months or maybe years of wasted time as well as diminish the credibility of the lab.

For all these reasons I have been pretty clear for a while that as anxious as I am to get my results I would rather that they be sure and accurate than fast, even though the process can be quite unsettling.

Yes it takes a while, but this is an "exploding" field that is relatively brand new. The lab is not in control of how many samples comes in and must follow the same protocol for each sample. In 20 years they will have a better understanding of expectable flow, but for now, this process has been available for only, what 8 years max and only now, in part due to the National Gen project, is the general public catching on. How does one forecast workload in these circumstances?

Personally, I am happy that they are overwhelmed. It means more people coming into the system. So few people have taken these tests and posted their results to the database I am dead certain that we do not yet know what all this means. I, for instance, belong to a small group of people colored with a specific haplogroup. Is that because there are few of us left, few of us who have tested, or few of us because we are new? These and other questions will only be answered as more people test and a lab set up to handle last year's flow is going to be stretched to handle next year's almost by definition.

If you think about it, an extra two weeks or an extra three months is not that terrible when you consider that up until this past year you did not have access to this kind of information at all. I hope this little note of mine does not come off too ... well too something. I want my results the day I authorize them if the truth were known. I check my FT DNA page daily. It is compulsive behavior and I am sure Freud would say it has something to do with something, but I empathize with the anxiety, but the tests will come out when they come out and when they do you will be able to move on with assurance that they have been exacting in their approach.

[spruithean]

I'm pretty thick headed today, but this doesn't make sense to me. the original tests were fine, why aren't the upgrades, and why is the deep clade taking so long?

these are our pending test remarks for today, when we were due to get the upgrades and deep clade returns.

Deep Clade-R(DCLADE-R) 02/06/2009 286 The Deep Clade tests are performed in a series of rounds to pinpoint your position on the current Y-DNA Haplogroup Tree. Your sample requires more than the average number of rounds to complete this testing process. As each round is completed, those results are added to your Y-DNA Haplotree and Y-DNA DYS Values sections. The next testing round is expected to be complete by this date.

Y-Refine37to67(Y-DNA38-47 Markers) 02/13/2009 286 This test failed to yield results for your sample. Your sample is being rerun now. Results from this round of testing are expected by this date.

Y-Refine37to67(Y-DNA48-60 Markers) 02/13/2009 286 This test failed to yield results for your sample. Your sample is being rerun now. Results from this round of testing are expected by this date.

Y-Refine37to67(Y-DNA61-67 Markers) 02/13/2009 286 This test failed to yield results for your sample. Your sample is being rerun now. Results from this round of testing are expected by this date.

Did you have any trouble with the first beginning tests? When you got the first DNA test? Were there any problems?

Good it be a not so good sample.

Hopefully you get your results soon.

[spruithean]

Did you have any trouble with the first beginning tests? When you got the first DNA test? Were there any problems?

Good it be a not so good sample.

Hopefully you get your results soon.

Could* it be a not so good sample.

[nekocat]

yes...

the first test was fine. came through a month early, no questions, no issues. both his and mine. this time, seems to be there's a problem. the message given is as clear as mud. well, I made some sense of the messages, but found the deep clade puzzling and the 37-64 (or whatever the exact numbers are) upgrade very vague.

I did mispeak when I used the term botched, but I do wish I knew more of why the situation occured.

I agree that the test should be the best they can give, and in that vein, take however long they need to, but knowing that doesn't make it any less puzzling or frustrating.

[vinnie]

My original due date for my E-deep clade was 11/19/08. I got partial results about a month ago, but as of now, I'm still waiting for final results on the last two E-a3 SNPs. I was told that because the results were inconclusive, they had to be run again, but I was also told that the E deep clades in general had been backed up. I've obviously done a good deal of testing through FTDNA, and before this experience, most of my other tests were either on time or a bit early. So, I don't know if this is due to the residual effects of damage due to the hurricane and/or the tremendous amount of work the lab has had due to the promotions.

[nekocat]

FTDNA emailed me...

and this is what they said. Darren didn't have specifics, but it is a little more information as to why there was a problem.

As for why a test will fail on an upgrade, there are a couple different reasons. Each panel or region we test needs to be decoded using different primers, or chemicals. Not everyone's DNA is compatible with the primers that work for the majority of people. For this reason the lab will need to stop the first test and take the time to come up with a new set of primers and run that to see if it will work successfully. The DNA also degrades over time, and for samples that may not have been strong quality to begin with can produce results when we first receive them but as time goes on we may not be able to obtain clear results because the sample may be too weak. In this case the lab will move onto the second vial that was provided. In certain cases if there is a value that is obtained from the run and it is unusually high or low, the lab will automatically rerun the sample to confirm the results.

I wonder if a rare blood type would affect it? probably not, but it's something to concider. I do know one of the vials we returned for my husband had blood in it because he scraped too hard.

[spruithean]

and this is what they said. Darren didn't have specifics, but it is a little more information as to why there was a problem.

As for why a test will fail on an upgrade, there are a couple different reasons. Each panel or region we test needs to be decoded using different primers, or chemicals. Not everyone's DNA is compatible with the primers that work for the majority of people. For this reason the lab will need to stop the first test and take the time to come up with a new set of primers and run that to see if it will work successfully. The DNA also degrades over time, and for samples that may not have been strong quality to begin with can produce results when we first receive them but as time goes on we may not be able to obtain clear results because the sample may be too weak. In this case the lab will move onto the second vial that was provided. In certain cases if there is a value that is obtained from the run and it is unusually high or low, the lab will automatically rerun the sample to confirm the results.

I wonder if a rare blood type would affect it? probably not, but it's something to concider. I do know one of the vials we returned for my husband had blood in it because he scraped too hard.

Interesting. Whats the blood type?? I don't think blood on the scraper would really affect it. Would just add to the DNA . Wouldn't the blood disappear in the vial?

[nekocat]

blood type...

He's O, or O+, I forget, but missing four traits that tend to cause transfusion rejections. the blood bank would practically salivate when they saw him or at least one of his brothers heading through their doors. most of us have the four traits that they're missing, but react negatively to other people's blood because of them. so his having an "oddity" with his blood might(????) cause a spike or dip in the test results. I could just be blowing smoke, I'm not sure.
he has this oddity and a genetic tweek in the family tree-some members have a third tear duct. he has a brother and a son with that tweek. you'd think dna testing would be helped by these familial traits, but I guess it's too early for it to.

[spruithean]

I'm not sure if blood type affects DNA testing. But who knows.

My father is A- one of the uncommon kinds, My mother is AB+, I am either A,B or AB + or -. I wonder if any of those have anything to do with Haplogroups all though I doubt it. Would be interesting to read about Haplogroups and the blood types that members are.

Not sure if Genetic Genealogy testing can find familial traits.

Good luck.

[nekocat]

not with ftdna

I've been told that ftdna doesn't test genes, but companies like 23andme do-at a fair price.

I hope the two get combined-for that matter, dna, genes, and x chromo. testing blended together some day for a better picture. or something better, no telling what will be discovered in the next decade.

my dad was AB+, my mother was A-. us 5 kids are either one or the other. don't know the two eldest, but the middle two claim AB-, and I'm A-.

[rucksack]

With any AB A parents, the possibilities of the children are:
A, B, AB. Rh could go either way.

http://www.biology.arizona.edu/Human_Bio/problem_sets/blood_types/btcalcA_popup.html

[nekocat]

a trickle....

at least there's that. today I checked his haplotree (something I do pretty consistantly) and one more item's been crossed from the list. they canceled out 1 early on, 7 recently, and 6 today. so 2,3,4, and 5 are left to test for. from what I've read on the forum, M222 is an interesting haplo, but I can't recall the details-and we won't know until the test is finished if he is or isn't M222.
but what will the final outcome tell us?

[spruithean]

at least there's that. today I checked his haplotree (something I do pretty consistantly) and one more item's been crossed from the list. they canceled out 1 early on, 7 recently, and 6 today. so 2,3,4, and 5 are left to test for. from what I've read on the forum, M222 is an interesting haplo, but I can't recall the details-and we won't know until the test is finished if he is or isn't M222.
but what will the final outcome tell us?

I have an R-M222 in my lineage (which connects to me by blood). R-M222 is NW Irish. Some say related to Niall Noigiallach but there is not 100% proof for that.

[nekocat]

M222

I knew that M222 was Irish connected, but what I think I was remembering was a specific marker (or two) within M222 that is rare-a dys marker number uncommon to most M222's. think it's further along in the string, after the 37 marker, so we will have to wait until mid-next month before we have any idea.